What we will cover today:
Lets work with the Lake Trout data as the weights are pretty cool and the assumptions may or may not hold
This is easily translated into any of the other dataframes you might want to use
lake trout
# the stuff above controls the output and is also set at the top so dont need here
# Load the pine needle data
# Use here() function to specify the path
lt_df <- read_csv("data/lake_trout.csv")
# Examine the first few rows
head(lt_df)
# A tibble: 6 × 5
sampling_site species length_mm mass_g lake
<chr> <chr> <dbl> <dbl> <chr>
1 I8 lake trout 515 1400 I8
2 I8 lake trout 468 1100 I8
3 I8 lake trout 527 1550 I8
4 I8 lake trout 525 1350 I8
5 I8 lake trout 517 1300 I8
6 I8 lake trout 607 2100 I8
T-tests are parametric tests
Random sampling
Normality
Equal variance
No outliers
Basic assumptions of parametric t-tests:
Random sampling
Normality
Equal variance
No outliers
Random sampling:
samples are randomly collected from populations; part of experimental design
Necessary for sample -> population inference
Basic assumptions of parametric t-tests:
Normality
equal variance
random sampling
no outliers
Lets do the above for one lake - NE 12
as if we were going to do a one sample T Test
ne12_data
Normality: Samples from normally distributed population
Basic assumptions of parametric t-tests:
Normality
equal variance
random sampling
no outliers
Lets do the above for one lake - NE 12
as if we were going to do a one sample T Test
ne12_data
Normality: Samples from normally distributed population
“Null hypothesis is that data is normally distributed”
[1] "Null hypothesis is that data is normally distributed"
Shapiro-Wilk normality test
data: ne12_data$length_mm
W = 0.94528, p-value = 1.56e-09
Basic assumptions of parametric t-tests:
Equal variance: samples are from populations with similar degree of variability
Lets compare a parametric T-Test to a Welch’s t-test
[1] "Standard t-test results for mass_g:"
Two Sample t-test
data: mass_g by lake
t = 14.181, df = 330, p-value < 2.2e-16
alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group Island Lake and group NE 12 is not equal to 0
95 percent confidence interval:
2266.304 2996.360
sample estimates:
mean in group Island Lake mean in group NE 12
3165.0000 533.6677
[1] "Welch's t-test results for mass_g:"
Welch Two Sample t-test
data: mass_g by lake
t = 5.1368, df = 9.0578, p-value = 0.0006016
alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group Island Lake and group NE 12 is not equal to 0
95 percent confidence interval:
1473.676 3788.989
sample estimates:
mean in group Island Lake mean in group NE 12
3165.0000 533.6677
Rank-based tests: no assumptions about distribution (non-parametric)
Ranks of data: observations assigned ranks, sums (and signs for paired tests) of ranks for groups compared
Mann-Whitney U test common alternative to independent samples t-test
Wilcoxon signed-rank test is alternative to paired t-test
Assumptions: similar distributions for groups, equal variance
Less power than parametric tests
Best when normality assumption can not be met by transformation (weird distribution) or large outliers
[1] "Mann-Whitney U test results mass_g:"
Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction
data: mass_g by lake
W = 3205.5, p-value = 9.506e-08
alternative hypothesis: true location shift is not equal to 0
Permutation tests based on resampling: reshuffling of original data
Resampling allows parameter estimation when distribution unknown, including SEs and CIs of statistics (means, medians)
Common approach is bootstrap: resample sample with replacement many times, recalculate sample stats
Use the perm
package
Ho: µA = µB
Ha: µA ≠µB
Calculates the difference ∆ in means between two groups
library(perm)
# Prepare data for permutation test
ne12_perm_data <- isl_ne12_df %>%
filter(lake == "NE 12") %>%
pull(length_mm)
# Randomly sample exactly 25 observations from NE 12 (set seed for reproducibility)
set.seed(123)
ne12_perm_data <- sample(ne12_perm_data, size = 25, replace = FALSE)
island_perm_data <- isl_ne12_df %>%
filter(lake == "Island Lake") %>%
pull(length_mm)
# Calculate the observed difference in means
observed_diff <- mean(ne12_perm_data, na.rm = TRUE) - mean(island_perm_data, na.rm = TRUE)
# Perform permutation test for difference in means using perm package
permTS(ne12_perm_data, island_perm_data,
alternative = "two.sided",
method = "exact.mc",
control = permControl(nmc = 10000))
Exact Permutation Test Estimated by Monte Carlo
data: GROUP 1 and GROUP 2
p-value = 2e-04
alternative hypothesis: true mean GROUP 1 - mean GROUP 2 is not equal to 0
sample estimates:
mean GROUP 1 - mean GROUP 2
-333.08
p-value estimated from 10000 Monte Carlo replications
99 percent confidence interval on p-value:
0.000000000 0.001059383
When assumptions aren’t met, transformations may help normalize data:
log10(x)
- Useful for right-skewed data, multiplicative effectssqrt(x)
- Useful for count data, moderately right-skewed distributionsStrengths: - High statistical power when assumptions are met - Well understood and widely accepted
Weaknesses: - Sensitive to violations of normality, equal variance - Heavily influenced by outliers
Strengths: - Robust to violations of equal variance assumption - Handles unequal sample sizes well - Still parametric (assumes normality)
Weaknesses: - Slightly less powerful than standard t-test when variances are equal - Still assumes normal distribution
Strengths: - Non-parametric: doesn’t assume normal distribution - Robust against outliers - Works with ordinal data
Weaknesses: - Less statistical power than parametric tests - Still assumes similar distributions and approximate equal variance - Tests median differences rather than mean differences
Strengths: - Distribution-free: doesn’t assume a specific distribution - Can be applied to many types of test statistics - Handles small sample sizes well - Directly estimates p-values through resampling
Weaknesses: - Computationally intensive - Assumes exchangeability under the null hypothesis - Requires similar distributions and equal variance
Statistical tests have different strengths and assumptions. The choice should be guided by your data characteristics, not just convenience. Always visualize your data before deciding on the appropriate test.