# Which is better? Hypothesis Testing or Confidence Interval

I am currently during my final year of schooling. I am curious to know (and I want to put this in my Math assignment), what is better 1-tailed Hypothesis Testing, where you see if a claim is justifiable, or is it a confidence interval, we only deal with 95% ones.

I personally am torn between the two and sometimes can't even tell the difference.

Confidence intervals use sample data and create an interval on that and then you see how different the claim is based on the sample. But you get a range of values so you can test more claims more easily.

With Hypothesis testing, you are pretty much doing the same, seeing how unusual a claim is based on the sample using a Z-Test.

The context of my assignment is the 2013 election in Australia. We are testing out claims made by political parties against the data collected by polls.

• Check out stats.stackexchange.com/tags/self-study/info for guidelines here. Here are two hints: there is no absolute reason for a confidence interval to be a 95% interval; there are many hypothesis tests other than z-tests. – Nick Cox Sep 10 '13 at 11:19
• ^ yes but what we look at in our course, we look at the z-test and judge the value found against 1.96 . My question is an extension of the course and I want to include it in. – Jineel Sep 10 '13 at 11:38
• I do know that confidence intervals can be of any confidence not just 95%.. and you can do the same with hypothesis testing depending on your rejection area – Jineel Sep 10 '13 at 11:39