The equation for this test is the following (that's how it is stated in most texts). I got a proof that it indeed has a t-distribution:


However, I've also seen it in the following form:


How can we prove that also the second test has a t-distribution? Why some books describe the test with the second equation?


Under the null hypothesis, $H_o: \mu_x = \mu_y$, so the equations are identical.

  • $\begingroup$ So it works like: we take the first formula, assume the means are identical in both populations and see what's the probability of them being equal based on the distribution of T (second equation)? If the probablity is very low, we deduce that it's not very likely the means are equal. $\endgroup$ – user4205580 Aug 13 '15 at 16:39
  • $\begingroup$ yes. that is basically it. $\endgroup$ – mandata Aug 13 '15 at 17:06
  • $\begingroup$ @user4205580 & mandata Without context it's hard to say, but my guess is the first formula is meant to test the null hypothesis $E(X) - E(Y) = \mu_X - \mu_Y$. Still, in both cases the statistic is t-distributed under the null hypothesis. $\endgroup$ – A. Donda Aug 13 '15 at 18:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.