STATISTICAL TOOLS
IN RESEARCH
Group 1: A researcher tested the presence of significant difference between
the antibacterial efficacy of Makabuhay Leaf Extract against P. aeruginosa
as compared to Chloramphenicol in terms of Antibacterial Index (AI). The
data are as follows:
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Average
T1
(Makabuhay Plant 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.10
Extract)
T2 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.38
(Chloramphenicol)
Group 2: A researcher tested if Chico Bark Decoction (CBD) has a
lowering effect on blood sugar level of Albino Mice. Eight experimental
units were used as samples. They served as both the experimental and
control groups. Blood sugar levels were taken a week after observation
without CBD and another week with CBD.
A B C D E F G H Ave
With CBD
3.25 3.22 3.67 3.53 3.76 3.39 3.55 3.41 3.47
(mmol/L)
Without CBD
3.11 3.23 4.02 4.11 3.47 4.21 4.11 4.27 3.82
(mmol/L)
Group 3: A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of Leaf Extract of Bignay
and Lumboy Leaves as compared to Phenol using Brine Shrimp Lethality
Assay. The results are as follows (in terms of number of dead brine shrimp
larvae after 24 hours of contact time)
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave
Bignay Leaves 24 18 25 22.33
Lumboy Leaves 21 21 17 19.67
Phenol 25 28 27 26.67
Group 4: A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of different concentrations
of Lumboy Leaves Extract as compared to Phenol using Brine Shrimp
Lethality Assay. The results are as follows (in terms of number of dead
brine shrimp larvae after 24 hours of contact time)
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave
25% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 19 22 22 21.00
50% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 23 26 23 24.00
75% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 25 27 26 26.00
Phenol 27 28 29 28.00
Group 5: A researcher tested if there is a significant interaction
between types of plant and the kind of extractant used. Lumboy
and Bignay Leaf Extracts were assessed with Ethanol and
Methanol as extractants using Brine Shrimp Lethality Assay, the
results are as follows.
Ethanol Methanol
Bignay Leaves 24 24 R1
26 20 R2
25 21 R3
Lumboy Leaves 27 22 R1
26 21 R2
26 19 R3
Statistics are like bikinis. What they
reveal is suggestive, but what they
conceal is vital.
- Aaron Levenstein
STATISTICS involves the systematic
collection, presentation, analysis and
interpretation of data.
Raw Data
Importance of
Few Statistics in
Meaningful Research
Numbers
Statistical
Conclusion
Solution to the
Problem
LOOK AT THESE
RESEARCH
STUDIES
A researcher tested the presence of significant difference between the
antibacterial efficacy of Makabuhay Leaf Extract against P. aeruginosa as
compared to Chloramphenicol in terms of Antibacterial Index (AI). The
data are as follows:
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Average
T1
(Makabuhay Plant 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.10
Extract)
T2 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.38
(Chloramphenicol)
A researcher tested the effect of Chico Bark Decoction (CBD) on blood
sugar level of Albino Mice. Eight experimental units were used as samples.
They served as both the experimental and control groups. Blood sugar
levels were taken a week after observation without CBD and another week
with CBD.
A B C D E F G H Ave
With CBD
3.25 3.22 3.67 3.53 3.76 3.39 3.55 3.41 3.47
(mmol/L)
Without CBD
3.11 3.23 4.02 4.11 3.47 4.21 4.11 4.27 3.82
(mmol/L)
A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of Leaf Extract of Bignay and Lumboy
Leaves as compared to Phenol using Brine Shrimp Lethality Assay. The
results are as follows (in terms of number of dead brine shrimp larvae after
24 hours of contact time)
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave
Bignay Leaves 24 18 25 22.33
Lumboy Leaves 21 21 17 19.67
Phenol 25 28 27 26.67
A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of different concentrations of Lumboy
Leaves Extract as compared to Phenol using Brine Shrimp Lethality Assay.
The results are as follows (in terms of number of dead brine shrimp larvae
after 24 hours of contact time)
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave
25% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 19 22 22 21.00
50% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 23 26 23 24.00
75% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 25 27 26 26.00
Phenol 27 28 29 28.00
A researcher tested if there is a significant interaction between
types of plant and the kind of extractant used. Lumboy and Bignay
Leaf Extracts were assessed with Ethanol and Methanol as
extractants using Brine Shrimp Lethality Assay, the results are as
follows.
Ethanol Methanol
Bignay Leaves 24 24 R1
26 20 R2
25 21 R3
Lumboy Leaves 27 22 R1
26 21 R2
26 19 R3
HYPOTHESIS
TESTING
Hypothesis testing, is a decision-making process for
evaluating claims about a population.
In hypothesis testing, the researcher must define
the population under study, state the particular hypotheses
that will be investigated, give
the significance level, select a sample from the population,
collect the data, perform the
calculations required for the statistical test, and reach a
conclusion.
What are the steps in
Hypothesis Testing?
STEP 1:
State your statistical hypothesis
STEP 2:
Selects the correct statistical test and
an appropriate level of significance.
Typical Statistical Tests Used in
Conducting Research
1. Dependent t-test
2. Independent t-test
3. One-Way Analysis of Variance
4. Two-Factor Analysis of Variance
DEPENDENT
t - Test
Dependent t-test
The dependent t-test (also called the paired t-
test or paired-samples t-test) compares the
means of two related groups to determine
whether there is a statistically significant
difference between these means.
When are samples correlated?
Two groups are correlated (dependent) if:
a)The same samples are observed before and after introduction of
independent variable
b) The same sample is both the experimental and control
groups
c) Each experimental unit is assigned to only one
condition.
INDEPENDENT
t - Test
Independent t - Test
The independent t-test, also called the two sample t-test,
independent-samples t-test or student's t-test, is a
statistical test that determines whether there is a
statistically significant difference between the means in
two unrelated groups.
One-Way
Analysis of Variance
One-Way Analysis of
Variance
The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is
used to determine whether there are any
statistically significant differences between the
means of three or more independent (unrelated)
groups.
Two-Way Analysis of
Variance
Two-Way Analysis of
Variance
The two-way ANOVA compares the mean differences
between groups that have been split on two
independent variables (called factors). The primary
purpose of a two-way ANOVA is to understand if there
is an interaction between the two independent variables
on the dependent variable.
LEVEL of
SIGNIFICANCE
In the hypothesis-testing situation, there are
four possible outcomes. In reality, the
null hypothesis may or may not be true, and a
decision is made to reject or not reject it on the
basis of the data obtained from a sample.
Ho is Ho is
TRUE FALSE
Type I Correct
Reject Ho
Error Rejection
Fail to
Reject Ho Correct Type II
Decision Error
LEVEL of SIGNIFICANCE
Statisticians generally agree on using three arbitrary
significance levels: the 0.10, 0.05, and 0.01 levels.
That is, if the null hypothesis is rejected, the
probability of a type I error will be 10%, 5%, or 1%,
depending on which level of significance is used.
STEP 3:
After a significance level is chosen, a
critical value is selected from a table
for the appropriate test.
Critical value
The critical value separates the critical
region from the noncritical region.
The critical or rejection region is the range of values of the test
value that indicates that there is a significant difference and that
the null hypothesis should be rejected.
The noncritical or non-rejection region is the range of values of
the test value that indicates that the difference was probably
due to chance and that the null hypothesis should not be
rejected.
The critical value for each appropriate type of
statistical test depends on the Level of
Significance and the Degree of Freedom.
Degree of Freedom
Degrees of freedom are the number of
values in a study that have the freedom to
vary.
Degree of Freedom
a) t-test for dependent samples: df = n – 1
b) t – test for independent samples: df = n1 + n2 – 2
Degree of Freedom
One-Way ANOVA:
•df (bt) = t – 1
•df (wt) = t (r – 1)
Degree of Freedom
Two-Way ANOVA:
•df (A) = a – 1
•df (B) = b – 1
•df (interaction) = (a – 1) (b – 1)
•dt (wt) = ab (r – 1)
STEP 4:
Compute for the statistical value or
the calculated value of the statistical
test.
STEP 5:
Locate whether the calculated value is
in the region of acceptance or region
of rejection. Then make a conclusion.
Accept the Null
Hypothesis
Reject the Null
Hypothesis
SPECIFIC
EXAMPLE
A researcher tested the presence of significant difference between the
antibacterial efficacy of Makabuhay Leaf Extract against P. aeruginosa as
compared to Chloramphenicol in terms of Antibacterial Index (AI). The
data are as follows:
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Average
T1
(Makabuhay Plant 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.10
Extract)
T2 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.28
(Chloramphenicol)
T1 T12 T2 T22
R1 2.30 5.29 2.6 6.76
R2 1.90 3.61 2.4 5.76
R3 2.20 4.84 2.4 5.76
R4 2.00 4.00 2.3 5.29
R5 2.10 4.41 2.2 4.84
Total 10.50 22.15 11.90 28.41
Mean: 2.1 2.38
df
-2.306 2.306
4. Calculated Value: −𝟐.𝟖𝟖𝟕𝟗𝟕𝟗𝟒𝟖𝟗
-2.888 -2.306 2.306
5. Decision and Conclusion:
Since the calculated value of the statistical test lies on the
region of rejection, we reject the null hypothesis. This
means that there is a significant difference between the
antibacterial efficacy of Makabuhay Plant Extract and
Chloramphenicol in favor of the Control. Therefore the
antibacterial property of Makabuhay plant is not
comparable to that of Chloramphenicol as far as P.
aeruginosa is concerned.
A researcher tested the effect of Chico Bark Decoction (CBD) on
blood sugar level of Albino Mice. Eight experimental units were
used as samples They served as both experimental and control
group. Blood sugar levels were taken at the end of 7 day
observation.
A B C D E F G H Ave
With CBD
3.25 3.22 3.67 3.53 3.76 3.39 3.55 3.41 3.47
(mmol/L)
Without CBD
3.11 3.23 4.02 4.11 3.47 4.21 4.11 4.27 3.82
(mmol/L)
USING
EXCEL
With CBD Without CBD
Mean 3.4725 3.81625
Variance 0.036421429 0.219626786
Observations 8 8
df 7
t Stat -2.2197
t Critical two-tail 2.3646
-2.3646 2.3646
4. Calculated Value: -2.2197
-2.2197
-2.3646 2.3646
5. Decision and Conclusion:
Since the calculated value of the statistical test lies on the
region of non-rejection, we accept the null hypothesis. This
means that there is no significant difference between the
sugar level of albino rats before and after the introduction of
Chico Bark Decoction. Therefore Chico Bark Decoction
does not exhibit blood sugar level lowering effect.
A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of Leaf Extract of Bignay and Lumboy
Leaves as compared to Phenol using Brine Shrimp Lethality Assay. The
results are as follows (in terms of number of dead brine shrimp larvae after
24 hours of contact time)
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave
T1 - Bignay Leaves 24 18 25 22.33
T2 - Lumboy Leaves 21 21 17 19.67
T3 - Phenol 25 28 27 26.67
Anova: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
Bignay Leaves 3 67 22.33 14.33
Lumboy Leaves 3 59 19.67 5.33
Phenol 3 80 26.67 2.33
ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F F crit
Between Groups 74.89 2 37.44 5.106 5.143
Within Groups 44.00 6 7.33
Total 118.89 8
1. Hypothesis: T1 = T2, T1 = T3, T2 = T3
3. Degree of freedom:
a) df (bt) = t – 1= 2
b) df (wt) = t (r – 1) = 3 x 2 = 6
Critical Value (2, 6, 0.05) = 5.14
4. Calculated F-value = 5.106
5.106
5.14
5. Decision:
Since the Calculated F-value lies on the region of
acceptance, we accept the Null Hypothesis. This
means that there is No Significant difference
between the cytotoxicity of Bignay Leaves, Lumboy
Leaves and Phenol. Therefore, in terms of cytotoxic
effects, Bignay Leaves and Lumboy leaves are
comparable to Phenol.
A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of different concentrations of Lumboy
Leaves Extract as compared to Phenol using Brine Shrimp Lethality Assay.
The results are as follows (in terms of number of dead brine shrimp larvae
after 24 hours of contact time)
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave
25% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 19 22 22 21.00
50% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 23 26 23 24.00
75% Lumboy Leaves Ext. 25 27 26 26.00
Phenol 27 28 29 28.00
Anova: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
25% Lumboy Ext. 3 63 21 3
50% Lumboy Ext. 3 72 24 3
75% Lumboy Ext. 3 78 26 1
Phenol 3 84 28 1
ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F F crit
Between Groups 80.25 3 26.75 13.375 4.066181
Within Groups 16 8 2
Total 96.25 11
1. Hypothesis: T1 = T2 = T3 = T4
3. Degree of freedom:
a) df (bt) = t – 1= 3
b) df (wt) = t (r – 1) = 4 x 2 = 8
Critical Value (3, 8, 0.05) = 4.07
4. Calculated F-value = 13.375
13.375
4.07
5. Decision:
Since the Calculated F-value lies on the region of
rejection, we reject the Null Hypothesis. This means
that there is a Significant difference between the
cytotoxicity of the different concentrations of
Lumboy Leaves Extract and Phenol.
Between which Treatments
does the Significant difference
exist?
Post Hoc Analysis
Post hoc tests are designed for situations in which the
researcher has already obtained a significant omnibus
F-test with a factor that consists of three or more
means and additional exploration of the differences
among means is needed to provide specific
information on which means are significantly different
from each other.
Scheffe Test
Scheffe Test
1. T1 vs T2
2. T1 vs T3
Scheffe Test
3. T1 vs T4
4. T2 vs T3
Scheffe Test
5. T2 vs T4
4. T3 vs T4
Scheffe Test
Critical Value
F’ = (k – 1)(Fcrit) = (3)(4.07) = 12.21
Scheffe Test
FS F’ Decision
T1 vs T2 6.75 12.21 Not Significant
T1 vs T3 18.75 12.21 Significant
T1 vs T4 36.75 12.21 Significant
T2 vs T3 3.0 12.21 Not Significant
T2 vs T4 12.0 12.21 Not Significant
T3 vs T4 3.0 12.21 Not Significant
Decision:
Treatment 1 is not comparable with Phenol, while
Treatments 2 and 3 are comparable to Phenol when
it comes to cytotoxicity.
A researcher tested the Cytotoxicity of Lumboy and Bignay Leaf
Extracts using Ethanol and Methanol as extractants. Using Brine
Shrimp Lethality Assay, the results are as follows
Ethanol Methanol
Bugnay Leaves 24 24 R1
26 20 R2
25 21 R3
Lumboy Leaves 27 22 R1
26 21 R2
26 19 R3
Anova: Two-Factor With Replication
SUMMARY Ethanol Methanol Total
Bugnay
Count 3.00 3.00 6.00
Sum 75.00 65.00 140.00
Average 25.00 21.67 23.33
Variance 1.00 4.33 5.47
Lumboy
Count 3.00 3.00 6.00
Sum 79.00 62.00 141.00
Average 26.33 20.67 23.50
Variance 0.33 2.33 10.70
Total
Count 6.00 6.00
Sum 154.00 127.00
Average 25.67 21.17
Variance 1.07 2.97
ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F F crit
Type of Plants 0.083 1.00 0.083 0.0417 5.32
Extractant 60.75 1.00 60.75 30.375 5.32
Interaction 4.0833 1.00 4.0833 2.0417 5.32
Within 16.00 8.00 2.00
Total 85.67 11.00
1. Hypothesis:
a) Ho: There is no difference between the means of dead
brine shrimp larvae for two types of plants
b) Ho: There is no different between the means of dead brine
shrimp larvae for two types of extractants.
c) Ho: There is no interaction effect between the types of
plants and types of extractants on the means of dead brine
shrimp larvae.
2. Level of Significance
3. Degree of freedom
a) df (A) = 1
b) df (B) = 1
c) df (Int) = 1
d) df (wt) = 8
Critical Value (1, 8, 0.05) = 5.32
4. Calculated Value: 5.32
ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F F crit
Type of Plants 1.33 1.00 1.33 1.33 5.32
Extractant 75.00 1.00 75.00 75.00 5.32
Interaction 1.33 1.00 1.33 1.33 5.32
Within 8.00 8.00 1.00
Total 85.67 11.00
5. Decision:
a) There is no difference between the means of dead brine
shrimp larvae for two types of plants
b) There is a difference between the means of dead brine shrimp
larvae for two types of extractants
c) There is no interaction effect between the types of plants and
types of extractants on the means of dead brine shrimp larvae.
THANK
YOU!
The researcher would like to know which among the plant extracts
tested is comparable with Chloramphenicol in terms of antibacterial
efficacy (zone of inhibition) against E. coli. The results are as
follows:
Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ave.
Bamban Leaf Extract 18 17 15 16.67
Tagbak Leaf Extract 22 21 20 21.00
Duso Leaf Extract 23 25 25 24.33
Chloramphenicol 29 26 24 26.33