I understand that the Wald test for regression coefficients is based on the following property that holds asymptotically (e.g. Wasserman (2006): All of Statistics, pages 153, 214-215): $$ \frac{(\hat{\beta}-\beta_{0})}{\widehat{\operatorname{se}}(\hat{\beta})}\sim \mathcal{N}(0,1) $$ Where $\hat{\beta}$ denotes the estimated regression coefficient, $\widehat{\operatorname{se}}(\hat{\beta})$ denotes the standard error of the regression coefficient and $\beta_{0}$ is the value of interest ($\beta_{0}$ is usually 0 to test whether the coefficient is significantly different from 0). So the size $\alpha$ Wald test is: reject $H_{0}$ when $|W|> z_{\alpha/2}$ where $$ W=\frac{\hat{\beta}}{\widehat{\operatorname{se}}(\hat{\beta})}. $$
But when you perform a linear regression with lm
in R, a $t$-value instead of a $z$-value is used to test if the regression coefficients differ significantly from 0 (with summary.lm
). Moreover, the output of glm
in R sometimes gives $z$- and sometimes $t$-values as test statistics. Apparently, $z$-values are used when the dispersion parameter is assumed to be known and $t$-values are used when the dispersion parameter is esimated (see this link).
Could someone explain, why a $t$-distribution is sometimes used for a Wald test even though the ratio of the coefficient and its standard error is assumed to be distributed as standard normal?
Edit after the question was answered
This post also provides useful information to the question.
lm
andglm
. $\endgroup$