# Two sample t test - equal variances not assumed - overview

This page offers structured overviews of one or more selected methods. Add additional methods for comparisons by clicking on the dropdown button in the right-hand column. To practice with a specific method click the button at the bottom row of the table

Two sample $t$ test - equal variances not assumed
Two way ANOVA
Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test
Pearson correlation
Independent/grouping variableIndependent/grouping variablesIndependent/grouping variableVariable 1
One categorical with 2 independent groupsTwo categorical, the first with $I$ independent groups and the second with $J$ independent groups ($I \geqslant 2$, $J \geqslant 2$)One categorical with 2 independent groupsOne quantitative of interval or ratio level
Dependent variableDependent variableDependent variableVariable 2
One quantitative of interval or ratio levelOne quantitative of interval or ratio levelOne of ordinal levelOne quantitative of interval or ratio level
Null hypothesisNull hypothesisNull hypothesisNull hypothesis
H0: $\mu_1 = \mu_2$

Here $\mu_1$ is the population mean for group 1, and $\mu_2$ is the population mean for group 2.
ANOVA $F$ tests:
• H0 for main and interaction effects together (model): no main effects and interaction effect
• H0 for independent variable A: no main effect for A
• H0 for independent variable B: no main effect for B
• H0 for the interaction term: no interaction effect between A and B
Like in one way ANOVA, we can also perform $t$ tests for specific contrasts and multiple comparisons. This is more advanced stuff.
If the dependent variable is measured on a continuous scale and the shape of the distribution of the dependent variable is the same in both populations:
• H0: the population median for group 1 is equal to the population median for group 2
Else:
Formulation 1:
• H0: the population scores in group 1 are not systematically higher or lower than the population scores in group 2
Formulation 2:
• H0: P(an observation from population 1 exceeds an observation from population 2) = P(an observation from population 2 exceeds observation from population 1)
Several different formulations of the null hypothesis can be found in the literature, and we do not agree with all of them. Make sure you (also) learn the one that is given in your text book or by your teacher.
H0: $\rho = \rho_0$

Here $\rho$ is the Pearson correlation in the population, and $\rho_0$ is the Pearson correlation in the population according to the null hypothesis (usually 0). The Pearson correlation is a measure for the strength and direction of the linear relationship between two variables of at least interval measurement level.
Alternative hypothesisAlternative hypothesisAlternative hypothesisAlternative hypothesis
H1 two sided: $\mu_1 \neq \mu_2$
H1 right sided: $\mu_1 > \mu_2$
H1 left sided: $\mu_1 < \mu_2$
ANOVA $F$ tests:
• H1 for main and interaction effects together (model): there is a main effect for A, and/or for B, and/or an interaction effect
• H1 for independent variable A: there is a main effect for A
• H1 for independent variable B: there is a main effect for B
• H1 for the interaction term: there is an interaction effect between A and B
If the dependent variable is measured on a continuous scale and the shape of the distribution of the dependent variable is the same in both populations:
• H1 two sided: the population median for group 1 is not equal to the population median for group 2
• H1 right sided: the population median for group 1 is larger than the population median for group 2
• H1 left sided: the population median for group 1 is smaller than the population median for group 2
Else:
Formulation 1:
• H1 two sided: the population scores in group 1 are systematically higher or lower than the population scores in group 2
• H1 right sided: the population scores in group 1 are systematically higher than the population scores in group 2
• H1 left sided: the population scores in group 1 are systematically lower than the population scores in group 2
Formulation 2:
• H1 two sided: P(an observation from population 1 exceeds an observation from population 2) $\neq$ P(an observation from population 2 exceeds an observation from population 1)
• H1 right sided: P(an observation from population 1 exceeds an observation from population 2) > P(an observation from population 2 exceeds an observation from population 1)
• H1 left sided: P(an observation from population 1 exceeds an observation from population 2) < P(an observation from population 2 exceeds an observation from population 1)
H1 two sided: $\rho \neq \rho_0$
H1 right sided: $\rho > \rho_0$
H1 left sided: $\rho < \rho_0$
AssumptionsAssumptionsAssumptionsAssumptions of test for correlation
• Within each population, the scores on the dependent variable are normally distributed
• Group 1 sample is a simple random sample (SRS) from population 1, group 2 sample is an independent SRS from population 2. That is, within and between groups, observations are independent of one another
• Within each of the $I \times J$ populations, the scores on the dependent variable are normally distributed
• The standard deviation of the scores on the dependent variable is the same in each of the $I \times J$ populations
• For each of the $I \times J$ groups, the sample is an independent and simple random sample from the population defined by that group. That is, within and between groups, observations are independent of one another
• Equal sample sizes for each group make the interpretation of the ANOVA output easier (unequal sample sizes result in overlap in the sum of squares; this is advanced stuff)
• Group 1 sample is a simple random sample (SRS) from population 1, group 2 sample is an independent SRS from population 2. That is, within and between groups, observations are independent of one another
• In the population, the two variables are jointly normally distributed (this covers the normality, homoscedasticity, and linearity assumptions)
• Sample of pairs is a simple random sample from the population of pairs. That is, pairs are independent of one another
Note: these assumptions are only important for the significance test and confidence interval, not for the correlation coefficient itself. The correlation coefficient just measures the strength of the linear relationship between two variables.
Test statisticTest statisticTest statisticTest statistic
$t = \dfrac{(\bar{y}_1 - \bar{y}_2) - 0}{\sqrt{\dfrac{s^2_1}{n_1} + \dfrac{s^2_2}{n_2}}} = \dfrac{\bar{y}_1 - \bar{y}_2}{\sqrt{\dfrac{s^2_1}{n_1} + \dfrac{s^2_2}{n_2}}}$
Here $\bar{y}_1$ is the sample mean in group 1, $\bar{y}_2$ is the sample mean in group 2, $s^2_1$ is the sample variance in group 1, $s^2_2$ is the sample variance in group 2, $n_1$ is the sample size of group 1, and $n_2$ is the sample size of group 2. The 0 represents the difference in population means according to the null hypothesis.

The denominator $\sqrt{\frac{s^2_1}{n_1} + \frac{s^2_2}{n_2}}$ is the standard error of the sampling distribution of $\bar{y}_1 - \bar{y}_2$. The $t$ value indicates how many standard errors $\bar{y}_1 - \bar{y}_2$ is removed from 0.

Note: we could just as well compute $\bar{y}_2 - \bar{y}_1$ in the numerator, but then the left sided alternative becomes $\mu_2 < \mu_1$, and the right sided alternative becomes $\mu_2 > \mu_1$.
For main and interaction effects together (model):
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square model}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
For independent variable A:
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square A}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
For independent variable B:
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square B}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
For the interaction term:
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square interaction}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
Note: mean square error is also known as mean square residual or mean square within.
Two different types of test statistics can be used; both will result in the same test outcome. The first is the Wilcoxon rank sum statistic $W$:
The second type of test statistic is the Mann-Whitney $U$ statistic:
• $U = W - \dfrac{n_1(n_1 + 1)}{2}$
where $n_1$ is the sample size of group 1.

Note: we could just as well base W and U on group 2. This would only 'flip' the right and left sided alternative hypotheses. Also, tables with critical values for $U$ are often based on the smaller of $U$ for group 1 and for group 2.
Test statistic for testing H0: $\rho = 0$:
• $t = \dfrac{r \times \sqrt{N - 2}}{\sqrt{1 - r^2}}$
where $r$ is the sample correlation $r = \frac{1}{N - 1} \sum_{j}\Big(\frac{x_{j} - \bar{x}}{s_x} \Big) \Big(\frac{y_{j} - \bar{y}}{s_y} \Big)$ and $N$ is the sample size
Test statistic for testing values for $\rho$ other than $\rho = 0$:
• $z = \dfrac{r_{Fisher} - \rho_{0_{Fisher}}}{\sqrt{\dfrac{1}{N - 3}}}$
• $r_{Fisher} = \dfrac{1}{2} \times \log\Bigg(\dfrac{1 + r}{1 - r} \Bigg )$, where $r$ is the sample correlation
• $\rho_{0_{Fisher}} = \dfrac{1}{2} \times \log\Bigg( \dfrac{1 + \rho_0}{1 - \rho_0} \Bigg )$, where $\rho_0$ is the population correlation according to H0
n.a.Pooled standard deviationn.a.n.a.
-\begin{aligned} s_p &= \sqrt{\dfrac{\sum\nolimits_{subjects} (\mbox{subject's score} - \mbox{its group mean})^2}{N - (I \times J)}}\\ &= \sqrt{\dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares error}}{\mbox{degrees of freedom error}}}\\ &= \sqrt{\mbox{mean square error}} \end{aligned} --
Sampling distribution of $t$ if H0 were trueSampling distribution of $F$ if H0 were trueSampling distribution of $W$ and of $U$ if H0 were trueSampling distribution of $t$ and of $z$ if H0 were true
Approximately the $t$ distribution with $k$ degrees of freedom, with $k$ equal to
$k = \dfrac{\Bigg(\dfrac{s^2_1}{n_1} + \dfrac{s^2_2}{n_2}\Bigg)^2}{\dfrac{1}{n_1 - 1} \Bigg(\dfrac{s^2_1}{n_1}\Bigg)^2 + \dfrac{1}{n_2 - 1} \Bigg(\dfrac{s^2_2}{n_2}\Bigg)^2}$
or
$k$ = the smaller of $n_1$ - 1 and $n_2$ - 1

First definition of $k$ is used by computer programs, second definition is often used for hand calculations.
For main and interaction effects together (model):
• $F$ distribution with $(I - 1) + (J - 1) + (I - 1) \times (J - 1)$ (df model, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
For independent variable A:
• $F$ distribution with $I - 1$ (df A, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
For independent variable B:
• $F$ distribution with $J - 1$ (df B, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
For the interaction term:
• $F$ distribution with $(I - 1) \times (J - 1)$ (df interaction, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
Here $N$ is the total sample size.

Sampling distribution of $W$:
For large samples, $W$ is approximately normally distributed with mean $\mu_W$ and standard deviation $\sigma_W$ if the null hypothesis were true. Here \begin{aligned} \mu_W &= \dfrac{n_1(n_1 + n_2 + 1)}{2}\\ \sigma_W &= \sqrt{\dfrac{n_1 n_2(n_1 + n_2 + 1)}{12}} \end{aligned} Hence, for large samples, the standardized test statistic $$z_W = \dfrac{W - \mu_W}{\sigma_W}\\$$ follows approximately the standard normal distribution if the null hypothesis were true. Note that if your $W$ value is based on group 2, $\mu_W$ becomes $\frac{n_2(n_1 + n_2 + 1)}{2}$.

Sampling distribution of $U$:
For large samples, $U$ is approximately normally distributed with mean $\mu_U$ and standard deviation $\sigma_U$ if the null hypothesis were true. Here \begin{aligned} \mu_U &= \dfrac{n_1 n_2}{2}\\ \sigma_U &= \sqrt{\dfrac{n_1 n_2(n_1 + n_2 + 1)}{12}} \end{aligned} Hence, for large samples, the standardized test statistic $$z_U = \dfrac{U - \mu_U}{\sigma_U}\\$$ follows approximately the standard normal distribution if the null hypothesis were true.

For small samples, the exact distribution of $W$ or $U$ should be used.

Note: if ties are present in the data, the formula for the standard deviations $\sigma_W$ and $\sigma_U$ is more complicated.
Sampling distribution of $t$:
• $t$ distribution with $N - 2$ degrees of freedom
Sampling distribution of $z$:
• Approximately the standard normal distribution
Significant?Significant?Significant?Significant?
Two sided:
Right sided:
Left sided:
• Check if $F$ observed in sample is equal to or larger than critical value $F^*$ or
• Find $p$ value corresponding to observed $F$ and check if it is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$
For large samples, the table for standard normal probabilities can be used:
Two sided:
Right sided:
Left sided:
$t$ Test two sided:
$t$ Test right sided:
$t$ Test left sided:
$z$ Test two sided:
$z$ Test right sided:
$z$ Test left sided:
Approximate $C\%$ confidence interval for $\mu_1 - \mu_2$n.a.n.a.Approximate $C$% confidence interval for $\rho$
$(\bar{y}_1 - \bar{y}_2) \pm t^* \times \sqrt{\dfrac{s^2_1}{n_1} + \dfrac{s^2_2}{n_2}}$
where the critical value $t^*$ is the value under the $t_{k}$ distribution with the area $C / 100$ between $-t^*$ and $t^*$ (e.g. $t^*$ = 2.086 for a 95% confidence interval when df = 20).

The confidence interval for $\mu_1 - \mu_2$ can also be used as significance test.
--First compute the approximate $C$% confidence interval for $\rho_{Fisher}$:
• $lower_{Fisher} = r_{Fisher} - z^* \times \sqrt{\dfrac{1}{N - 3}}$
• $upper_{Fisher} = r_{Fisher} + z^* \times \sqrt{\dfrac{1}{N - 3}}$
where $r_{Fisher} = \frac{1}{2} \times \log\Bigg(\dfrac{1 + r}{1 - r} \Bigg )$ and the critical value $z^*$ is the value under the normal curve with the area $C / 100$ between $-z^*$ and $z^*$ (e.g. $z^*$ = 1.96 for a 95% confidence interval).
Then transform back to get the approximate $C$% confidence interval for $\rho$:
• lower bound = $\dfrac{e^{2 \times lower_{Fisher}} - 1}{e^{2 \times lower_{Fisher}} + 1}$
• upper bound = $\dfrac{e^{2 \times upper_{Fisher}} - 1}{e^{2 \times upper_{Fisher}} + 1}$
n.a.Effect sizen.a.Properties of the Pearson correlation coefficient
-
• Proportion variance explained $R^2$:
Proportion variance of the dependent variable $y$ explained by the independent variables and the interaction effect together:
\begin{align} R^2 &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares model}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}} \end{align} $R^2$ is the proportion variance explained in the sample. It is a positively biased estimate of the proportion variance explained in the population.

• Proportion variance explained $\eta^2$:
Proportion variance of the dependent variable $y$ explained by an independent variable or interaction effect:
\begin{align} \eta^2_A &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares A}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}}\\ \\ \eta^2_B &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares B}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}}\\ \\ \eta^2_{int} &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares int}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}} \end{align} $\eta^2$ is the proportion variance explained in the sample. It is a positively biased estimate of the proportion variance explained in the population.

• Proportion variance explained $\omega^2$:
Corrects for the positive bias in $\eta^2$ and is equal to:
\begin{align} \omega^2_A &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares A} - \mbox{degrees of freedom A} \times \mbox{mean square error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total} + \mbox{mean square error}}\\ \\ \omega^2_B &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares B} - \mbox{degrees of freedom B} \times \mbox{mean square error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total} + \mbox{mean square error}}\\ \\ \omega^2_{int} &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares int} - \mbox{degrees of freedom int} \times \mbox{mean square error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total} + \mbox{mean square error}}\\ \end{align} $\omega^2$ is a better estimate of the explained variance in the population than $\eta^2$. Only for balanced designs (equal sample sizes).

• Proportion variance explained $\eta^2_{partial}$: \begin{align} \eta^2_{partial\,A} &= \frac{\mbox{sum of squares A}}{\mbox{sum of squares A} + \mbox{sum of squares error}}\\ \\ \eta^2_{partial\,B} &= \frac{\mbox{sum of squares B}}{\mbox{sum of squares B} + \mbox{sum of squares error}}\\ \\ \eta^2_{partial\,int} &= \frac{\mbox{sum of squares int}}{\mbox{sum of squares int} + \mbox{sum of squares error}} \end{align}
-
• The Pearson correlation coefficient is a measure for the linear relationship between two quantitative variables.
• The Pearson correlation coefficient squared reflects the proportion of variance explained in one variable by the other variable.
• The Pearson correlation coefficient can take on values between -1 (perfect negative relationship) and 1 (perfect positive relationship). A value of 0 means no linear relationship.
• The absolute size of the Pearson correlation coefficient is not affected by any linear transformation of the variables. However, the sign of the Pearson correlation will flip when the scores on one of the two variables are multiplied by a negative number (reversing the direction of measurement of that variable).
For example:
• the correlation between $x$ and $y$ is equivalent to the correlation between $3x + 5$ and $2y - 6$.
• the absolute value of the correlation between $x$ and $y$ is equivalent to the absolute value of the correlation between $-3x + 5$ and $2y - 6$. However, the signs of the two correlation coefficients will be in opposite directions, due to the multiplication of $x$ by $-3$.
• The Pearson correlation coefficient does not say anything about causality.
• The Pearson correlation coefficient is sensitive to outliers.
Visual representationn.a.n.a.n.a.
---
n.a.ANOVA tablen.a.n.a.
- --
n.a.Equivalent toEquivalent toEquivalent to
-OLS regression with two categorical independent variables and the interaction term, transformed into $(I - 1)$ + $(J - 1)$ + $(I - 1) \times (J - 1)$ code variables.If there are no ties in the data, the two sided Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test is equivalent to the Kruskal-Wallis test with an independent variable with 2 levels ($I$ = 2).OLS regression with one independent variable:
• $b_1 = r \times \frac{s_y}{s_x}$
• Results significance test ($t$ and $p$ value) testing $H_0$: $\beta_1 = 0$ are equivalent to results significance test testing $H_0$: $\rho = 0$
Example contextExample contextExample contextExample context
Is the average mental health score different between men and women?Is the average mental health score different between people from a low, moderate, and high economic class? And is the average mental health score different between men and women? And is there an interaction effect between economic class and gender?Do men tend to score higher on social economic status than women? Is there a linear relationship between physical health and mental health?
SPSSSPSSSPSSSPSS
Analyze > Compare Means > Independent-Samples T Test...
• Put your dependent (quantitative) variable in the box below Test Variable(s) and your independent (grouping) variable in the box below Grouping Variable
• Click on the Define Groups... button. If you can't click on it, first click on the grouping variable so its background turns yellow
• Fill in the value you have used to indicate your first group in the box next to Group 1, and the value you have used to indicate your second group in the box next to Group 2
• Continue and click OK
Analyze > General Linear Model > Univariate...
• Put your dependent (quantitative) variable in the box below Dependent Variable and your two independent (grouping) variables in the box below Fixed Factor(s)
Analyze > Nonparametric Tests > Legacy Dialogs > 2 Independent Samples...
• Put your dependent variable in the box below Test Variable List and your independent (grouping) variable in the box below Grouping Variable
• Click on the Define Groups... button. If you can't click on it, first click on the grouping variable so its background turns yellow
• Fill in the value you have used to indicate your first group in the box next to Group 1, and the value you have used to indicate your second group in the box next to Group 2
• Continue and click OK
Analyze > Correlate > Bivariate...
• Put your two variables in the box below Variables
JamoviJamoviJamoviJamovi
T-Tests > Independent Samples T-Test
• Put your dependent (quantitative) variable in the box below Dependent Variables and your independent (grouping) variable in the box below Grouping Variable
• Under Tests, select Welch's
• Under Hypothesis, select your alternative hypothesis
ANOVA > ANOVA
• Put your dependent (quantitative) variable in the box below Dependent Variable and your two independent (grouping) variables in the box below Fixed Factors
T-Tests > Independent Samples T-Test
• Put your dependent variable in the box below Dependent Variables and your independent (grouping) variable in the box below Grouping Variable
• Under Tests, select Mann-Whitney U
• Under Hypothesis, select your alternative hypothesis
Regression > Correlation Matrix
• Put your two variables in the white box at the right
• Under Correlation Coefficients, select Pearson (selected by default)
• Under Hypothesis, select your alternative hypothesis
Practice questionsPractice questionsPractice questionsPractice questions