Some quality
control experiments require destructive sampling in order to measure some
particular characteristic of the product (i.e., the test to determine whether
the item is defective destroys the item). The cost of the destructive sampling
often dictates small samples.
A manufacturer
of printers for personal computers wishes to estimate the mean number of
characters printed before the print head fails. The manufacturer tests 15
randomly selected print heads and records the number of characters printed
until failure for each. The 15 measurements (in millions of characters) are
shown in the stem and leaf plot below. The sample mean and standard deviation
are 1.25 and 0.17, respectively.
Stem-and-leaf of Characters, N
= 15
Leaf Unit = 0.010
9| 2
10| 7 9
11| 3 8
12| 0 2 5 9
13| 2 3 6
14| 3 8
15| 5
Example 2
A study was
conducted on the effect of a special class designed to improve children’s
verbal skills. Each of 19 children took a verbal skills test twice, both before
and after a 3-week period in the special class. From the sample, the “after –
before” scores had a mean of 0.695 points and a standard deviation of 1.118
points. Also, a dotplot of the sample of differences
appears fairly mound-shaped.
Behavioral
researchers developed an index designed to measure managerial success. The
index (measured on a 100-point scale) is based on the manager’s length of time
in the organization and his or her level within the
firm; the higher the index, the more successful the manager. Suppose a
researcher wants to compare the average success index of two groups of managers
at a large manufacturing plant. Managers in Group 1 engage in a high volume of
interactions with people outside their work unit. Managers in Group 2 rarely
interact with people outside their work unit. Independent random samples of 12
and 15 managers are selected from Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The sample from
Group 1 has mean and standard deviation, 65.33 points and 6.61 points,
respectively. The sample from Group 2 has mean and standard deviation, 56.02
points and 9.93 points, respectively. Both sample distributions look fairly
mound-shaped.
Is
there evidence of a difference between the group means? Carry out the
significance test (state hypotheses, check conditions of the test, calculate
test statistic and p-value, interpret the results)
Hypotheses
Let
be the average success
index for all Group 1 managers, and let
be the average success
index for all Group 2 managers.
We want to test
the hypotheses
![]()
Choice of Test and
Check of Conditions
This is clearly
a two-sample problem. Since the population standard deviations are unknown and
we have small samples, we need to use the two-sample t test. Is the normality condition met? Yes, because
we’re told both sample-data distributions look mound-shaped (indicating that
the populations they came from are also mound-shaped). Is the equal-variances condition met? Yes, since
, by our rule of thumb it seems reasonable that the two
population variances are the same. Hence, we can proceed with the two-sample
t-test with the pooled estimate of
.
Test Statistic
The pooled estimate
of the variance is
, and the test statistic is 
P-value
To find the p-value,
we must use the t distribution with (12 + 15 – 2) = 25 degrees of freedom, and
since our alternative hypothesis is two-sided, we must double the p-value.
The p-value is
for a t-distribution with 25 degrees of freedom. The value 2.786
isn’t shown in Table 4, but the value 2.787 is (which is close enough, so we’ll
use it). So, based on Table 4, the p-value is 2(0.005) = 0.01.
Definition of the
P-value and Conclusion in the Context of the Problem
If the average
success index is the same for managers from both groups, then there is only a
1% chance of getting our particular difference in sample average indexes or a
more extreme difference. Because our data are so unlikely, we have very strong
evidence that there is in fact a difference between average success indexes for
the two groups. These results are statistically significant at even the stringent
0.01 significance level.
Practical Significance
It is also
important to consider the practical significance. A 95% confidence interval for
is (2.43 points,
16.19 points). We should ask the researchers if this difference is of practical
importance.