hypothesis in multiple regression

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Section 5.3: Multiple Regression Explanation, Assumptions, Interpretation, and Write Up

Learning Objectives

At the end of this section you should be able to answer the following questions:

• Explain the difference between Multiple Regression and Simple Regression.
• Explain the assumptions underlying Multiple Regression.

Multiple Regression is a step beyond simple regression. The main difference between simple and multiple regression is that multiple regression includes two or more independent variables – sometimes called predictor variables – in the model, rather than just one.

As such, the purpose of multiple regression is to determine the utility of a set of predictor variables for predicting an outcome, which is generally some important event or behaviour. This outcome can be designated as the outcome variable, the dependent variable, or the criterion variable. For example, you might hypothesise that the need to belong will predict motivations for Facebook use and that self-esteem and meaningful existence will uniquely predict motivations for Facebook use.

Before beginning your analysis, you should consider the following points:

• Regression analyses reveal relationships among variables (relationship between the criterion variable and the linear combination of a set of predictor variables) but do not imply a causal relationship.
• A regression solution – or set of predictor variables – is sensitive to combinations of variables. Whether a predictor is important in a solution depends on the other predictors in the set. If the predictor of interest is the only one that assesses some important facet of the outcome, it will appear important. If a predictor is only one of several predictors that assess the same important facet of the outcome, it will appear less important.  For a good set of predictor variables – the smallest set of uncorrelated variables is best.

PowerPoint: Venn Diagrams

Please click on the link labeled “Venn Diagrams” to work through an example.

• Chapter Five – Venn Diagrams

In these Venn Diagrams, you can see why it is best for the predictors to be strongly correlated with the dependent variable but uncorrelated with the other Independent Variables. This reduces the amount of shared variance between the independent variables.  The illustration in Slide 2 shows logical relationships between predictors, for two different possible regression models in separate Venn diagrams. On the left, you can see three partially correlated independent variables on a single dependent variable. The three partially correlated independent variables are physical health, mental health, and spiritual health and the dependent variable is life satisfaction. On the right, you have three highly correlated independent variables (e.g., BMI, blood pressure, heart rate) on the dependent variable of life satisfaction. The model on the left would have some use in discovering the associations between those variables, however, the model on the right would not be useful, as all three of the independent variables are basically measuring the same thing and are mostly accounting for the same variability in the dependent variable.

There are two main types of regression with multiple independent variables:

• Standard or Single Step: Where all predictors enter the regression together.
• Sequential or Hierarchical:  Where all predictors are entered in blocks. Each block represents one step.

We will now be exploring the single step multiple regression:

All predictors enter the regression equation at once. Each predictor is treated as if it had been analysed in the regression model after all other predictors had been analysed. These predictors are evaluated by the shared variance (i.e., level of prediction) shared between the dependant variable and the individual predictor variable.

Multiple Regression Assumptions

There are a number of assumptions that should be assessed before performing a multiple regression analysis:

• The dependant variable (the variable of interest) needs to be using a continuous scale.
• There are two or more independent variables. These can be measured using either continuous or categorical means.
• The three or more variables of interest should have a linear relationship, which you can check by using a scatterplot.
• The data should have homoscedasticity. In other words, the line of best fit is not dissimilar as the data points move across the line in a positive or negative direction. Homoscedasticity can be checked by producing standardised residual plots against the unstandardized predicted values.
• The data should not have two or more independent variables that are highly correlated. This is called multicollinearity which can be checked using Variance-inflation-factor or VIF values. High VIF indicates that the associated independent variable is highly collinear with the other variables in the model.
• There should be no spurious outliers.
• The residuals (errors) should be approximately normally distributed. This can be checked by a histogram (with a superimposed normal curve) and by plotting the of the standardised residuals using either a P-P Plot, or a Normal Q-Q Plot .

Multiple Regression Interpretation

For our example research question, we will be looking at the combined effect of three predictor variables – perceived life stress, location, and age – on the outcome variable of physical health?  

PowerPoint: Standard Regression

Please open the output at the link labeled “Chapter Five – Standard Regression” to view the output.

• Chapter Five – Standard Regression

Slide 1 contains the standard regression analysis output.

On Slide 2 you can see in the red circle, the test statistics are significant.  The F-statistic examines the overall significance of the model, and shows if your predictors as a group provide a better fit to the data than no predictor variables, which they do in this example.

The R 2 values are shown in the green circle. The R 2 value shows the total amount of variance accounted for in the criterion by the predictors, and the adjusted R 2 is the estimated value of  R 2 in the population.  

Moving on to the individual variable effects on Slide 3, you can see the significance of the contribution of individual predictors in light blue. The unstandardized slope or the B value is shown in red, which represents the change caused by the variable (e.g., increasing  1 unit of perceived stress will raise physical illness by .40). Finally, you can see the standardised slope value in green, which are also known as beta values. These values are standardised ranging from +/-0 to 1, similar to an r value.  

We should also briefly discuss dummy variables:

A dummy variable is a variable that is used to represent categorical information relating to the participants in a study. This could include gender, location, race, age groups, and you get the idea.  Dummy variables are most often represented as dichotomous variables (they only have two values). When performing a regression, it is easier for interpretation if the values for the dummy variable is set to 0 or 1. 1 usually resents when a characteristic is present. For example, a question asking the participants “Do you have a drivers license” with a forced choice response of yes or no.

In this example on Slide 3 and circled in red, the variable is gender with male = 0, and female = 1. A positive Beta (B) means an association with 1, whereas a negative beta means an association with 0. In this case, being female was associated with greater levels of physical illness.

Multiple Regression Write Up

Here is an example of how to write up the results of a standard multiple regression analysis:

In order to test the research question, a multiple regression was conducted, with age, gender (0 = male, 1 = female), and perceived life stress as the predictors, with levels of physical illness as the dependent variable. Overall, the results showed the utility of the predictive model was significant, F (3,363) = 39.61, R 2 = .25, p < .001. All of the predictors explain a large amount of the variance between the variables (25%).  The results showed that perceived stress and gender of participants were significant positive predictors of physical illness ( β =.47, t = 9.96, p < .001, and β =.15, t = 3.23, p = .001, respectively). The results showed that age ( β =-.02, t = -0.49 p = .63) was not a significant predictor of perceived stress.

Statistics for Research Students Copyright © 2022 by University of Southern Queensland is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Save 10% on All AnalystPrep 2024 Study Packages with Coupon Code BLOG10 .

• Payment Plans
• Product List
• Partnerships

• Try Free Trial
• Study Packages
• Levels I, II & III Lifetime Package
• Video Lessons
• Study Notes
• Practice Questions
• Levels II & III Lifetime Package
• About the Exam
• About your Instructor
• Part I Study Packages
• Parts I & II Packages
• Part I & Part II Lifetime Package
• Part II Study Packages
• Exams P & FM Lifetime Package
• Quantitative Questions
• Verbal Questions
• Data Insight Questions
• Live Tutoring
• About your Instructors
• EA Practice Questions
• Data Sufficiency Questions
• Integrated Reasoning Questions

Hypothesis Tests and Confidence Intervals in Multiple Regression

After completing this reading you should be able to:

• Construct, apply, and interpret hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for a single coefficient in a multiple regression.
• Construct, apply, and interpret joint hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for multiple coefficients in a multiple regression.
• Interpret the \(F\)-statistic.
• Interpret tests of a single restriction involving multiple coefficients.
• Interpret confidence sets for multiple coefficients.
• Identify examples of omitted variable bias in multiple regressions.
• Interpret the \({ R }^{ 2 }\) and adjusted \({ R }^{ 2 }\) in a multiple regression.

Hypothesis Tests and Confidence Intervals for a Single Coefficient

This section is about the calculation of the standard error, hypotheses testing, and confidence interval construction for a single regression in a multiple regression equation.

Introduction

In a previous chapter, we looked at simple linear regression where we deal with just one regressor (independent variable). The response (dependent variable) is assumed to be affected by just one independent variable.  M ultiple regression, on the other hand ,  simultaneously considers the influence of multiple explanatory variables on a response variable Y. We may want to establish the confidence interval of one of the independent variables. We may want to evaluate whether any particular independent variable has a significant effect on the dependent variable. Finally, We may also want to establish whether the independent variables as a group have a significant effect on the dependent variable. In this chapter, we delve into ways all this can be achieved.

Hypothesis Tests for a single coefficient

Suppose that we are testing the hypothesis that the true coefficient \({ \beta }_{ j }\) on the \(j\)th regressor takes on some specific value \({ \beta }_{ j,0 }\). Let the alternative hypothesis be two-sided. Therefore, the following is the mathematical expression of the two hypotheses:

$$ { H }_{ 0 }:{ \beta }_{ j }={ \beta }_{ j,0 }\quad vs.\quad { H }_{ 1 }:{ \beta }_{ j }\neq { \beta }_{ j,0 } $$

This expression represents the two-sided alternative. The following are the steps to follow while testing the null hypothesis:

• Computing the coefficient’s standard error.

$$ p-value=2\Phi \left( -|{ t }^{ act }| \right) $$

• Also, the \(t\)-statistic can be compared to the critical value corresponding to the significance level that is desired for the test.

Confidence Intervals for a Single Coefficient

The confidence interval for a regression coefficient in multiple regression is calculated and interpreted the same way as it is in simple linear regression. 

The t-statistic has n – k – 1 degrees of freedom where k = number of independents

Supposing that an interval contains the true value of \({ \beta }_{ j }\) with a probability of 95%. This is simply the 95% two-sided confidence interval for \({ \beta }_{ j }\). The implication here is that the true value of \({ \beta }_{ j }\) is contained in 95% of all possible randomly drawn variables.

Alternatively, the 95% two-sided confidence interval for \({ \beta }_{ j }\) is the set of values that are impossible to reject when a two-sided hypothesis test of 5% is applied. Therefore, with a large sample size:

$$ 95\%\quad confidence\quad interval\quad for\quad { \beta }_{ j }=\left[ { \hat { \beta } }_{ j }-1.96SE\left( { \hat { \beta } }_{ j } \right) ,{ \hat { \beta } }_{ j }+1.96SE\left( { \hat { \beta } }_{ j } \right) \right] $$

Tests of Joint Hypotheses

In this section, we consider the formulation of the joint hypotheses on multiple regression coefficients. We will further study the application of an \(F\)-statistic in their testing.

Hypotheses Testing on Two or More Coefficients

Joint null hypothesis.

In multiple regression, we canno t test the null hypothesis that all slope coefficients are equal 0 based on t -tests that each individual slope coefficient equals 0. Why? individual t-tests do not account for the effects of interactions among the independent variables.

For this reason, we conduct the F-test which uses the F-statistic .  The F-test tests the null hypothesis that all of the slope coefficients in the multiple regression model are jointly equal to 0, .i.e.,

\(F\)-Statistic

The F-statistic, which is always a one-tailed test , is calculated as:

To determine whether at least one of the coefficients is statistically significant, the calculated F-statistic is compared with the one-tailed critical F-value, at the appropriate level of significance.

Decision rule:

Rejection of the null hypothesis at a stated level of significance indicates that at least one of the coefficients is significantly different than zero, i.e, at least one of the independent variables in the regression model makes a significant contribution to the dependent variable.

An analyst runs a regression of monthly value-stock returns on four independent variables over 48 months.

The total sum of squares for the regression is 360, and the sum of squared errors is 120.

Test the null hypothesis at the 5% significance level (95% confidence) that all the four independent variables are equal to zero.

\({ H }_{ 0 }:{ \beta }_{ 1 }=0,{ \beta }_{ 2 }=0,\dots ,{ \beta }_{ 4 }=0 \)

\({ H }_{ 1 }:{ \beta }_{ j }\neq 0\) (at least one j is not equal to zero, j=1,2… k )

ESS = TSS – SSR = 360 – 120 = 240

The calculated test statistic = (ESS/k)/(SSR/(n-k-1))

=(240/4)/(120/43) = 21.5

\({ F }_{ 43 }^{ 4 }\) is approximately 2.44 at 5% significance level.

Decision: Reject H 0 .

Conclusion: at least one of the 4 independents is significantly different than zero.

Omitted Variable Bias in Multiple Regression

This is the bias in the OLS estimator arising when at least one included regressor gets collaborated with an omitted variable. The following conditions must be satisfied for an omitted variable bias to occur:

• There must be a correlation between at least one of the included regressors and the omitted variable.
• The dependent variable \(Y\) must be determined by the omitted variable.

Practical Interpretation of the \({ R }^{ 2 }\) and the adjusted \({ R }^{ 2 }\), \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\)

To determine the accuracy within which the OLS regression line fits the data, we apply the coefficient of determination and the regression’s standard error . 

The coefficient of determination, represented by \({ R }^{ 2 }\), is a measure of the “goodness of fit” of the regression. It is interpreted as the percentage of variation in the dependent variable explained by the independent variables

\({ R }^{ 2 }\) is not a reliable indicator of the explanatory power of a multiple regression model.Why? \({ R }^{ 2 }\) almost always increases as new independent variables are added to the model, even if the marginal contribution of the new variable is not statistically significant. Thus, a high \({ R }^{ 2 }\) may reflect the impact of a large set of independents rather than how well the set explains the dependent.This problem is solved by the use of the adjusted \({ R }^{ 2 }\) (extensively covered in chapter 8)

The following are the factors to watch out when guarding against applying the \({ R }^{ 2 }\) or the \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\):

• An added variable doesn’t have to be statistically significant just because the \({ R }^{ 2 }\) or the \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\) has increased.
• It is not always true that the regressors are a true cause of the dependent variable, just because there is a high \({ R }^{ 2 }\) or \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\).
• It is not necessary that there is no omitted variable bias just because we have a high \({ R }^{ 2 }\) or \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\).
• It is not necessarily true that we have the most appropriate set of regressors just because we have a high \({ R }^{ 2 }\) or \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\).
• It is not necessarily true that we have an inappropriate set of regressors just because we have a low \({ R }^{ 2 }\) or \({ \bar { R } }^{ 2 }\).

An economist tests the hypothesis that GDP growth in a certain country can be explained by interest rates and inflation.

Using some 30 observations, the analyst formulates the following regression equation:

$$ GDP growth = { \hat { \beta } }_{ 0 } + { \hat { \beta } }_{ 1 } Interest+ { \hat { \beta } }_{ 2 } Inflation $$

Regression estimates are as follows:

Is the coefficient for interest rates significant at 5%?

• Since the test statistic < t-critical, we accept H 0 ; the interest rate coefficient is  not   significant at the 5% level.
• Since the test statistic > t-critical, we reject H 0 ; the interest rate coefficient is not significant at the 5% level.
• Since the test statistic > t-critical, we reject H 0 ; the interest rate coefficient is significant at the 5% level.
• Since the test statistic < t-critical, we accept H 1 ; the interest rate coefficient is significant at the 5% level.

The correct answer is  C .

We have GDP growth = 0.10 + 0.20(Int) + 0.15(Inf)

Hypothesis:

$$ { H }_{ 0 }:{ \hat { \beta } }_{ 1 } = 0 \quad vs \quad { H }_{ 1 }:{ \hat { \beta } }_{ 1 }≠0 $$

The test statistic is:

$$ t = \left( \frac { 0.20 – 0 }{ 0.05 } \right)  = 4 $$

The critical value is t (α/2, n-k-1) = t 0.025,27  = 2.052 (which can be found on the t-table).

Conclusion : The interest rate coefficient is significant at the 5% level.

Offered by AnalystPrep

Modeling Cycles: MA, AR, and ARMA Models

Empirical approaches to risk metrics and hedging, nonstationary time series.

After completing this reading, you should be able to: Describe linear and nonlinear... Read More

Central Clearing

After completing this reading, you should be able to: Provide examples of the... Read More

Hypothesis Testing

After completing this reading, you should be able to: Construct an appropriate null... Read More

Properties of Interest Rates

After completing this reading, you should be able to: Describe the various categories... Read More

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Multiple Regression Analysis using SPSS Statistics

Introduction.

Multiple regression is an extension of simple linear regression. It is used when we want to predict the value of a variable based on the value of two or more other variables. The variable we want to predict is called the dependent variable (or sometimes, the outcome, target or criterion variable). The variables we are using to predict the value of the dependent variable are called the independent variables (or sometimes, the predictor, explanatory or regressor variables).

For example, you could use multiple regression to understand whether exam performance can be predicted based on revision time, test anxiety, lecture attendance and gender. Alternately, you could use multiple regression to understand whether daily cigarette consumption can be predicted based on smoking duration, age when started smoking, smoker type, income and gender.

Multiple regression also allows you to determine the overall fit (variance explained) of the model and the relative contribution of each of the predictors to the total variance explained. For example, you might want to know how much of the variation in exam performance can be explained by revision time, test anxiety, lecture attendance and gender "as a whole", but also the "relative contribution" of each independent variable in explaining the variance.

This "quick start" guide shows you how to carry out multiple regression using SPSS Statistics, as well as interpret and report the results from this test. However, before we introduce you to this procedure, you need to understand the different assumptions that your data must meet in order for multiple regression to give you a valid result. We discuss these assumptions next.

SPSS Statistics

Assumptions.

When you choose to analyse your data using multiple regression, part of the process involves checking to make sure that the data you want to analyse can actually be analysed using multiple regression. You need to do this because it is only appropriate to use multiple regression if your data "passes" eight assumptions that are required for multiple regression to give you a valid result. In practice, checking for these eight assumptions just adds a little bit more time to your analysis, requiring you to click a few more buttons in SPSS Statistics when performing your analysis, as well as think a little bit more about your data, but it is not a difficult task.

Before we introduce you to these eight assumptions, do not be surprised if, when analysing your own data using SPSS Statistics, one or more of these assumptions is violated (i.e., not met). This is not uncommon when working with real-world data rather than textbook examples, which often only show you how to carry out multiple regression when everything goes well! However, don’t worry. Even when your data fails certain assumptions, there is often a solution to overcome this. First, let's take a look at these eight assumptions:

• Assumption #1: Your dependent variable should be measured on a continuous scale (i.e., it is either an interval or ratio variable). Examples of variables that meet this criterion include revision time (measured in hours), intelligence (measured using IQ score), exam performance (measured from 0 to 100), weight (measured in kg), and so forth. You can learn more about interval and ratio variables in our article: Types of Variable . If your dependent variable was measured on an ordinal scale, you will need to carry out ordinal regression rather than multiple regression. Examples of ordinal variables include Likert items (e.g., a 7-point scale from "strongly agree" through to "strongly disagree"), amongst other ways of ranking categories (e.g., a 3-point scale explaining how much a customer liked a product, ranging from "Not very much" to "Yes, a lot").
• Assumption #2: You have two or more independent variables , which can be either continuous (i.e., an interval or ratio variable) or categorical (i.e., an ordinal or nominal variable). For examples of continuous and ordinal variables , see the bullet above. Examples of nominal variables include gender (e.g., 2 groups: male and female), ethnicity (e.g., 3 groups: Caucasian, African American and Hispanic), physical activity level (e.g., 4 groups: sedentary, low, moderate and high), profession (e.g., 5 groups: surgeon, doctor, nurse, dentist, therapist), and so forth. Again, you can learn more about variables in our article: Types of Variable . If one of your independent variables is dichotomous and considered a moderating variable, you might need to run a Dichotomous moderator analysis .
• Assumption #3: You should have independence of observations (i.e., independence of residuals ), which you can easily check using the Durbin-Watson statistic, which is a simple test to run using SPSS Statistics. We explain how to interpret the result of the Durbin-Watson statistic, as well as showing you the SPSS Statistics procedure required, in our enhanced multiple regression guide.
• Assumption #4: There needs to be a linear relationship between (a) the dependent variable and each of your independent variables, and (b) the dependent variable and the independent variables collectively . Whilst there are a number of ways to check for these linear relationships, we suggest creating scatterplots and partial regression plots using SPSS Statistics, and then visually inspecting these scatterplots and partial regression plots to check for linearity. If the relationship displayed in your scatterplots and partial regression plots are not linear, you will have to either run a non-linear regression analysis or "transform" your data, which you can do using SPSS Statistics. In our enhanced multiple regression guide, we show you how to: (a) create scatterplots and partial regression plots to check for linearity when carrying out multiple regression using SPSS Statistics; (b) interpret different scatterplot and partial regression plot results; and (c) transform your data using SPSS Statistics if you do not have linear relationships between your variables.
• Assumption #5: Your data needs to show homoscedasticity , which is where the variances along the line of best fit remain similar as you move along the line. We explain more about what this means and how to assess the homoscedasticity of your data in our enhanced multiple regression guide. When you analyse your own data, you will need to plot the studentized residuals against the unstandardized predicted values. In our enhanced multiple regression guide, we explain: (a) how to test for homoscedasticity using SPSS Statistics; (b) some of the things you will need to consider when interpreting your data; and (c) possible ways to continue with your analysis if your data fails to meet this assumption.
• Assumption #6: Your data must not show multicollinearity , which occurs when you have two or more independent variables that are highly correlated with each other. This leads to problems with understanding which independent variable contributes to the variance explained in the dependent variable, as well as technical issues in calculating a multiple regression model. Therefore, in our enhanced multiple regression guide, we show you: (a) how to use SPSS Statistics to detect for multicollinearity through an inspection of correlation coefficients and Tolerance/VIF values; and (b) how to interpret these correlation coefficients and Tolerance/VIF values so that you can determine whether your data meets or violates this assumption.
• Assumption #7: There should be no significant outliers , high leverage points or highly influential points . Outliers, leverage and influential points are different terms used to represent observations in your data set that are in some way unusual when you wish to perform a multiple regression analysis. These different classifications of unusual points reflect the different impact they have on the regression line. An observation can be classified as more than one type of unusual point. However, all these points can have a very negative effect on the regression equation that is used to predict the value of the dependent variable based on the independent variables. This can change the output that SPSS Statistics produces and reduce the predictive accuracy of your results as well as the statistical significance. Fortunately, when using SPSS Statistics to run multiple regression on your data, you can detect possible outliers, high leverage points and highly influential points. In our enhanced multiple regression guide, we: (a) show you how to detect outliers using "casewise diagnostics" and "studentized deleted residuals", which you can do using SPSS Statistics, and discuss some of the options you have in order to deal with outliers; (b) check for leverage points using SPSS Statistics and discuss what you should do if you have any; and (c) check for influential points in SPSS Statistics using a measure of influence known as Cook's Distance, before presenting some practical approaches in SPSS Statistics to deal with any influential points you might have.
• Assumption #8: Finally, you need to check that the residuals (errors) are approximately normally distributed (we explain these terms in our enhanced multiple regression guide). Two common methods to check this assumption include using: (a) a histogram (with a superimposed normal curve) and a Normal P-P Plot; or (b) a Normal Q-Q Plot of the studentized residuals. Again, in our enhanced multiple regression guide, we: (a) show you how to check this assumption using SPSS Statistics, whether you use a histogram (with superimposed normal curve) and Normal P-P Plot, or Normal Q-Q Plot; (b) explain how to interpret these diagrams; and (c) provide a possible solution if your data fails to meet this assumption.

You can check assumptions #3, #4, #5, #6, #7 and #8 using SPSS Statistics. Assumptions #1 and #2 should be checked first, before moving onto assumptions #3, #4, #5, #6, #7 and #8. Just remember that if you do not run the statistical tests on these assumptions correctly, the results you get when running multiple regression might not be valid. This is why we dedicate a number of sections of our enhanced multiple regression guide to help you get this right. You can find out about our enhanced content as a whole on our Features: Overview page, or more specifically, learn how we help with testing assumptions on our Features: Assumptions page.

In the section, Procedure , we illustrate the SPSS Statistics procedure to perform a multiple regression assuming that no assumptions have been violated. First, we introduce the example that is used in this guide.

A health researcher wants to be able to predict "VO 2 max", an indicator of fitness and health. Normally, to perform this procedure requires expensive laboratory equipment and necessitates that an individual exercise to their maximum (i.e., until they can longer continue exercising due to physical exhaustion). This can put off those individuals who are not very active/fit and those individuals who might be at higher risk of ill health (e.g., older unfit subjects). For these reasons, it has been desirable to find a way of predicting an individual's VO 2 max based on attributes that can be measured more easily and cheaply. To this end, a researcher recruited 100 participants to perform a maximum VO 2 max test, but also recorded their "age", "weight", "heart rate" and "gender". Heart rate is the average of the last 5 minutes of a 20 minute, much easier, lower workload cycling test. The researcher's goal is to be able to predict VO 2 max based on these four attributes: age, weight, heart rate and gender.

Setup in SPSS Statistics

In SPSS Statistics, we created six variables: (1) VO 2 max , which is the maximal aerobic capacity; (2) age , which is the participant's age; (3) weight , which is the participant's weight (technically, it is their 'mass'); (4) heart_rate , which is the participant's heart rate; (5) gender , which is the participant's gender; and (6) caseno , which is the case number. The caseno variable is used to make it easy for you to eliminate cases (e.g., "significant outliers", "high leverage points" and "highly influential points") that you have identified when checking for assumptions. In our enhanced multiple regression guide, we show you how to correctly enter data in SPSS Statistics to run a multiple regression when you are also checking for assumptions. You can learn about our enhanced data setup content on our Features: Data Setup page. Alternately, see our generic, "quick start" guide: Entering Data in SPSS Statistics .

Test Procedure in SPSS Statistics

The seven steps below show you how to analyse your data using multiple regression in SPSS Statistics when none of the eight assumptions in the previous section, Assumptions , have been violated. At the end of these seven steps, we show you how to interpret the results from your multiple regression. If you are looking for help to make sure your data meets assumptions #3, #4, #5, #6, #7 and #8, which are required when using multiple regression and can be tested using SPSS Statistics, you can learn more in our enhanced guide (see our Features: Overview page to learn more).

Note: The procedure that follows is identical for SPSS Statistics versions 18 to 28 , as well as the subscription version of SPSS Statistics, with version 28 and the subscription version being the latest versions of SPSS Statistics. However, in version 27 and the subscription version , SPSS Statistics introduced a new look to their interface called " SPSS Light ", replacing the previous look for versions 26 and earlier versions , which was called " SPSS Standard ". Therefore, if you have SPSS Statistics versions 27 or 28 (or the subscription version of SPSS Statistics), the images that follow will be light grey rather than blue. However, the procedure is identical .

Published with written permission from SPSS Statistics, IBM Corporation.

Note: Don't worry that you're selecting A nalyze > R egression > L inear... on the main menu or that the dialogue boxes in the steps that follow have the title, Linear Regression . You have not made a mistake. You are in the correct place to carry out the multiple regression procedure. This is just the title that SPSS Statistics gives, even when running a multiple regression procedure.

Interpreting and Reporting the Output of Multiple Regression Analysis

SPSS Statistics will generate quite a few tables of output for a multiple regression analysis. In this section, we show you only the three main tables required to understand your results from the multiple regression procedure, assuming that no assumptions have been violated. A complete explanation of the output you have to interpret when checking your data for the eight assumptions required to carry out multiple regression is provided in our enhanced guide. This includes relevant scatterplots and partial regression plots, histogram (with superimposed normal curve), Normal P-P Plot and Normal Q-Q Plot, correlation coefficients and Tolerance/VIF values, casewise diagnostics and studentized deleted residuals.

However, in this "quick start" guide, we focus only on the three main tables you need to understand your multiple regression results, assuming that your data has already met the eight assumptions required for multiple regression to give you a valid result:

Determining how well the model fits

The first table of interest is the Model Summary table. This table provides the R , R 2 , adjusted R 2 , and the standard error of the estimate, which can be used to determine how well a regression model fits the data:

The " R " column represents the value of R , the multiple correlation coefficient . R can be considered to be one measure of the quality of the prediction of the dependent variable; in this case, VO 2 max . A value of 0.760, in this example, indicates a good level of prediction. The " R Square " column represents the R 2 value (also called the coefficient of determination), which is the proportion of variance in the dependent variable that can be explained by the independent variables (technically, it is the proportion of variation accounted for by the regression model above and beyond the mean model). You can see from our value of 0.577 that our independent variables explain 57.7% of the variability of our dependent variable, VO 2 max . However, you also need to be able to interpret " Adjusted R Square " ( adj. R 2 ) to accurately report your data. We explain the reasons for this, as well as the output, in our enhanced multiple regression guide.

Statistical significance

The F -ratio in the ANOVA table (see below) tests whether the overall regression model is a good fit for the data. The table shows that the independent variables statistically significantly predict the dependent variable, F (4, 95) = 32.393, p < .0005 (i.e., the regression model is a good fit of the data).

Estimated model coefficients

The general form of the equation to predict VO 2 max from age , weight , heart_rate , gender , is:

predicted VO 2 max = 87.83 – (0.165 x age ) – (0.385 x weight ) – (0.118 x heart_rate ) + (13.208 x gender )

This is obtained from the Coefficients table, as shown below:

Unstandardized coefficients indicate how much the dependent variable varies with an independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant. Consider the effect of age in this example. The unstandardized coefficient, B 1 , for age is equal to -0.165 (see Coefficients table). This means that for each one year increase in age, there is a decrease in VO 2 max of 0.165 ml/min/kg.

Statistical significance of the independent variables

You can test for the statistical significance of each of the independent variables. This tests whether the unstandardized (or standardized) coefficients are equal to 0 (zero) in the population. If p < .05, you can conclude that the coefficients are statistically significantly different to 0 (zero). The t -value and corresponding p -value are located in the " t " and " Sig. " columns, respectively, as highlighted below:

You can see from the " Sig. " column that all independent variable coefficients are statistically significantly different from 0 (zero). Although the intercept, B 0 , is tested for statistical significance, this is rarely an important or interesting finding.

Putting it all together

You could write up the results as follows:

A multiple regression was run to predict VO 2 max from gender, age, weight and heart rate. These variables statistically significantly predicted VO 2 max, F (4, 95) = 32.393, p < .0005, R 2 = .577. All four variables added statistically significantly to the prediction, p < .05.

If you are unsure how to interpret regression equations or how to use them to make predictions, we discuss this in our enhanced multiple regression guide. We also show you how to write up the results from your assumptions tests and multiple regression output if you need to report this in a dissertation/thesis, assignment or research report. We do this using the Harvard and APA styles. You can learn more about our enhanced content on our Features: Overview page.

Statistics Made Easy

Understanding the Null Hypothesis for Linear Regression

Linear regression is a technique we can use to understand the relationship between one or more predictor variables and a response variable .

If we only have one predictor variable and one response variable, we can use simple linear regression , which uses the following formula to estimate the relationship between the variables:

ŷ = β 0 + β 1 x

• ŷ: The estimated response value.
• β 0 : The average value of y when x is zero.
• β 1 : The average change in y associated with a one unit increase in x.
• x: The value of the predictor variable.

Simple linear regression uses the following null and alternative hypotheses:

• H 0 : β 1 = 0
• H A : β 1 ≠ 0

The null hypothesis states that the coefficient β 1 is equal to zero. In other words, there is no statistically significant relationship between the predictor variable, x, and the response variable, y.

The alternative hypothesis states that β 1 is not equal to zero. In other words, there is a statistically significant relationship between x and y.

If we have multiple predictor variables and one response variable, we can use multiple linear regression , which uses the following formula to estimate the relationship between the variables:

ŷ = β 0 + β 1 x 1 + β 2 x 2 + … + β k x k

• β 0 : The average value of y when all predictor variables are equal to zero.
• β i : The average change in y associated with a one unit increase in x i .
• x i : The value of the predictor variable x i .

Multiple linear regression uses the following null and alternative hypotheses:

• H 0 : β 1 = β 2 = … = β k = 0
• H A : β 1 = β 2 = … = β k ≠ 0

The null hypothesis states that all coefficients in the model are equal to zero. In other words, none of the predictor variables have a statistically significant relationship with the response variable, y.

The alternative hypothesis states that not every coefficient is simultaneously equal to zero.

The following examples show how to decide to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis in both simple linear regression and multiple linear regression models.

Example 1: Simple Linear Regression

Suppose a professor would like to use the number of hours studied to predict the exam score that students will receive in his class. He collects data for 20 students and fits a simple linear regression model.

The following screenshot shows the output of the regression model:

The fitted simple linear regression model is:

Exam Score = 67.1617 + 5.2503*(hours studied)

To determine if there is a statistically significant relationship between hours studied and exam score, we need to analyze the overall F value of the model and the corresponding p-value:

• Overall F-Value:  47.9952
• P-value:  0.000

Since this p-value is less than .05, we can reject the null hypothesis. In other words, there is a statistically significant relationship between hours studied and exam score received.

Example 2: Multiple Linear Regression

Suppose a professor would like to use the number of hours studied and the number of prep exams taken to predict the exam score that students will receive in his class. He collects data for 20 students and fits a multiple linear regression model.

The fitted multiple linear regression model is:

Exam Score = 67.67 + 5.56*(hours studied) – 0.60*(prep exams taken)

To determine if there is a jointly statistically significant relationship between the two predictor variables and the response variable, we need to analyze the overall F value of the model and the corresponding p-value:

• Overall F-Value:  23.46
• P-value:  0.00

Since this p-value is less than .05, we can reject the null hypothesis. In other words, hours studied and prep exams taken have a jointly statistically significant relationship with exam score.

Note: Although the p-value for prep exams taken (p = 0.52) is not significant, prep exams combined with hours studied has a significant relationship with exam score.

Additional Resources

Understanding the F-Test of Overall Significance in Regression How to Read and Interpret a Regression Table How to Report Regression Results How to Perform Simple Linear Regression in Excel How to Perform Multiple Linear Regression in Excel

Featured Posts

Hey there. My name is Zach Bobbitt. I have a Masters of Science degree in Applied Statistics and I’ve worked on machine learning algorithms for professional businesses in both healthcare and retail. I’m passionate about statistics, machine learning, and data visualization and I created Statology to be a resource for both students and teachers alike.  My goal with this site is to help you learn statistics through using simple terms, plenty of real-world examples, and helpful illustrations.

2 Replies to “Understanding the Null Hypothesis for Linear Regression”

Thank you Zach, this helped me on homework!

Great articles, Zach.

I would like to cite your work in a research paper.

Could you provide me with your last name and initials.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join the Statology Community

I have read and agree to the terms & conditions

User Preferences

Content preview.

Arcu felis bibendum ut tristique et egestas quis:

• Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris
• Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
• Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident

Keyboard Shortcuts

6.4 - the hypothesis tests for the slopes.

At the beginning of this lesson, we translated three different research questions pertaining to heart attacks in rabbits ( Cool Hearts dataset ) into three sets of hypotheses we can test using the general linear F -statistic. The research questions and their corresponding hypotheses are:

Hypotheses 1

Is the regression model containing at least one predictor useful in predicting the size of the infarct?

• \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{1} = \beta_{2} = \beta_{3} = 0\)
• \(H_{A} \colon\) At least one \(\beta_{j} ≠ 0\) (for j = 1, 2, 3)

Hypotheses 2

Is the size of the infarct significantly (linearly) related to the area of the region at risk?

• \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{1} = 0 \)
• \(H_{A} \colon \beta_{1} \ne 0 \)

Hypotheses 3

(Primary research question) Is the size of the infarct area significantly (linearly) related to the type of treatment upon controlling for the size of the region at risk for infarction?

• \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{2} = \beta_{3} = 0\)
• \(H_{A} \colon \) At least one \(\beta_{j} ≠ 0\) (for j = 2, 3)

Let's test each of the hypotheses now using the general linear F -statistic:

\(F^*=\left(\dfrac{SSE(R)-SSE(F)}{df_R-df_F}\right) \div \left(\dfrac{SSE(F)}{df_F}\right)\)

To calculate the F -statistic for each test, we first determine the error sum of squares for the reduced and full models — SSE ( R ) and SSE ( F ), respectively. The number of error degrees of freedom associated with the reduced and full models — \(df_{R}\) and \(df_{F}\), respectively — is the number of observations, n , minus the number of parameters, p , in the model. That is, in general, the number of error degrees of freedom is n - p . We use statistical software, such as Minitab's F -distribution probability calculator, to determine the P -value for each test.

Testing all slope parameters equal 0 Section  

To answer the research question: "Is the regression model containing at least one predictor useful in predicting the size of the infarct?" To do so, we test the hypotheses:

• \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{1} = \beta_{2} = \beta_{3} = 0 \)
• \(H_{A} \colon\) At least one \(\beta_{j} \ne 0 \) (for j = 1, 2, 3)

The full model

The full model is the largest possible model — that is, the model containing all of the possible predictors. In this case, the full model is:

\(y_i=(\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\beta_2x_{i2}+\beta_3x_{i3})+\epsilon_i\)

The error sum of squares for the full model, SSE ( F ), is just the usual error sum of squares, SSE , that appears in the analysis of variance table. Because there are 4 parameters in the full model, the number of error degrees of freedom associated with the full model is \(df_{F} = n - 4\).

The reduced model

The reduced model is the model that the null hypothesis describes. Because the null hypothesis sets each of the slope parameters in the full model equal to 0, the reduced model is:

\(y_i=\beta_0+\epsilon_i\)

The reduced model suggests that none of the variations in the response y is explained by any of the predictors. Therefore, the error sum of squares for the reduced model, SSE ( R ), is just the total sum of squares, SSTO , that appears in the analysis of variance table. Because there is only one parameter in the reduced model, the number of error degrees of freedom associated with the reduced model is \(df_{R} = n - 1 \).

Upon plugging in the above quantities, the general linear F -statistic:

\(F^*=\dfrac{SSE(R)-SSE(F)}{df_R-df_F} \div \dfrac{SSE(F)}{df_F}\)

becomes the usual " overall F -test ":

\(F^*=\dfrac{SSR}{3} \div \dfrac{SSE}{n-4}=\dfrac{MSR}{MSE}\)

That is, to test \(H_{0}\) : \(\beta_{1} = \beta_{2} = \beta_{3} = 0 \), we just use the overall F -test and P -value reported in the analysis of variance table:

Analysis of Variance

Regression equation.

Inf = - 0.135 + 0.613 Area - 0.2435 X2 - 0.0657 X3

There is sufficient evidence ( F = 16.43, P < 0.001) to conclude that at least one of the slope parameters is not equal to 0.

In general, to test that all of the slope parameters in a multiple linear regression model are 0, we use the overall F -test reported in the analysis of variance table.

Testing one slope parameter is 0 Section  

Now let's answer the second research question: "Is the size of the infarct significantly (linearly) related to the area of the region at risk?" To do so, we test the hypotheses:

Again, the full model is the model containing all of the possible predictors:

The error sum of squares for the full model, SSE ( F ), is just the usual error sum of squares, SSE . Alternatively, because the three predictors in the model are \(x_{1}\), \(x_{2}\), and \(x_{3}\), we can denote the error sum of squares as SSE (\(x_{1}\), \(x_{2}\), \(x_{3}\)). Again, because there are 4 parameters in the model, the number of error degrees of freedom associated with the full model is \(df_{F} = n - 4 \).

Because the null hypothesis sets the first slope parameter, \(\beta_{1}\), equal to 0, the reduced model is:

\(y_i=(\beta_0+\beta_2x_{i2}+\beta_3x_{i3})+\epsilon_i\)

Because the two predictors in the model are \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\), we denote the error sum of squares as SSE (\(x_{2}\), \(x_{3}\)). Because there are 3 parameters in the model, the number of error degrees of freedom associated with the reduced model is \(df_{R} = n - 3\).

The general linear statistic:

simplifies to:

\(F^*=\dfrac{SSR(x_1|x_2, x_3)}{1}\div \dfrac{SSE(x_1,x_2, x_3)}{n-4}=\dfrac{MSR(x_1|x_2, x_3)}{MSE(x_1,x_2, x_3)}\)

Getting the numbers from the Minitab output:

we determine that the value of the F -statistic is:

\(F^* = \dfrac{SSR(x_1 \vert x_2, x_3)}{1} \div \dfrac{SSE(x_1, x_2, x_3)}{28} = \dfrac{0.63742}{0.01946}=32.7554\)

The P -value is the probability — if the null hypothesis were true — that we would get an F -statistic larger than 32.7554. Comparing our F -statistic to an F -distribution with 1 numerator degree of freedom and 28 denominator degrees of freedom, Minitab tells us that the probability is close to 1 that we would observe an F -statistic smaller than 32.7554:

F distribution with 1 DF in Numerator and 28 DF in denominator

Therefore, the probability that we would get an F -statistic larger than 32.7554 is close to 0. That is, the P -value is < 0.001. There is sufficient evidence ( F = 32.8, P < 0.001) to conclude that the size of the infarct is significantly related to the size of the area at risk after the other predictors x2 and x3 have been taken into account.

But wait a second! Have you been wondering why we couldn't just use the slope's t -statistic to test that the slope parameter, \(\beta_{1}\), is 0? We can! Notice that the P -value ( P < 0.001) for the t -test ( t * = 5.72):

Coefficients

is the same as the P -value we obtained for the F -test. This will always be the case when we test that only one slope parameter is 0. That's because of the well-known relationship between a t -statistic and an F -statistic that has one numerator degree of freedom:

\(t_{(n-p)}^{2}=F_{(1, n-p)}\)

For our example, the square of the t -statistic, 5.72, equals our F -statistic (within rounding error). That is:

\(t^{*2}=5.72^2=32.72=F^*\)

So what have we learned in all of this discussion about the equivalence of the F -test and the t -test? In short:

Compare the output obtained when \(x_{1}\) = Area is entered into the model last :

Inf = - 0.135 - 0.2435 X2 - 0.0657 X3 + 0.613 Area

to the output obtained when \(x_{1}\) = Area is entered into the model first :

The t -statistic and P -value are the same regardless of the order in which \(x_{1}\) = Area is entered into the model. That's because — by its equivalence to the F -test — the t -test for one slope parameter adjusts for all of the other predictors included in the model.

• We can use either the F -test or the t -test to test that only one slope parameter is 0. Because the t -test results can be read right off of the Minitab output, it makes sense that it would be the test that we'll use most often.
• But, we have to be careful with our interpretations! The equivalence of the t -test to the F -test has taught us something new about the t -test. The t -test is a test for the marginal significance of the \(x_{1}\) predictor after the other predictors \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) have been taken into account. It does not test for the significance of the relationship between the response y and the predictor \(x_{1}\) alone.

Testing a subset of slope parameters is 0 Section  

Finally, let's answer the third — and primary — research question: "Is the size of the infarct area significantly (linearly) related to the type of treatment upon controlling for the size of the region at risk for infarction?" To do so, we test the hypotheses:

• \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{2} = \beta_{3} = 0 \)
• \(H_{A} \colon\) At least one \(\beta_{j} \ne 0 \) (for j = 2, 3)

Because the null hypothesis sets the second and third slope parameters, \(\beta_{2}\) and \(\beta_{3}\), equal to 0, the reduced model is:

\(y_i=(\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1})+\epsilon_i\)

The ANOVA table for the reduced model is:

Because the only predictor in the model is \(x_{1}\), we denote the error sum of squares as SSE (\(x_{1}\)) = 0.8793. Because there are 2 parameters in the model, the number of error degrees of freedom associated with the reduced model is \(df_{R} = n - 2 = 32 – 2 = 30\).

\begin{align} F^*&=\dfrac{SSE(R)-SSE(F)}{df_R-df_F} \div\dfrac{SSE(F)}{df_F}\\&=\dfrac{0.8793-0.54491}{30-28} \div\dfrac{0.54491}{28}\\&= \dfrac{0.33439}{2} \div 0.01946\\&=8.59.\end{align}

Alternatively, we can calculate the F-statistic using a partial F-test :

\begin{align}F^*&=\dfrac{SSR(x_2, x_3|x_1)}{2}\div \dfrac{SSE(x_1,x_2, x_3)}{n-4}\\&=\dfrac{MSR(x_2, x_3|x_1)}{MSE(x_1,x_2, x_3)}.\end{align}

To conduct the test, we regress y = InfSize on \(x_{1}\) = Area and \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3 }\)— in order (and with "Sequential sums of squares" selected under "Options"):

Inf = - 0.135 + 0.613 Area - 0.2435 X2 - 0.0657 X3

yielding SSR (\(x_{2}\) | \(x_{1}\)) = 0.31453, SSR (\(x_{3}\) | \(x_{1}\), \(x_{2}\)) = 0.01981, and MSE = 0.54491/28 = 0.01946. Therefore, the value of the partial F -statistic is:

\begin{align} F^*&=\dfrac{SSR(x_2, x_3|x_1)}{2}\div \dfrac{SSE(x_1,x_2, x_3)}{n-4}\\&=\dfrac{0.31453+0.01981}{2}\div\dfrac{0.54491}{28}\\&= \dfrac{0.33434}{2} \div 0.01946\\&=8.59,\end{align}

which is identical (within round-off error) to the general F-statistic above. The P -value is the probability — if the null hypothesis were true — that we would observe a partial F -statistic more extreme than 8.59. The following Minitab output:

F distribution with 2 DF in Numerator and 28 DF in denominator

tells us that the probability of observing such an F -statistic that is smaller than 8.59 is 0.9988. Therefore, the probability of observing such an F -statistic that is larger than 8.59 is 1 - 0.9988 = 0.0012. The P -value is very small. There is sufficient evidence ( F = 8.59, P = 0.0012) to conclude that the type of cooling is significantly related to the extent of damage that occurs — after taking into account the size of the region at risk.

Summary of MLR Testing Section  

For the simple linear regression model, there is only one slope parameter about which one can perform hypothesis tests. For the multiple linear regression model, there are three different hypothesis tests for slopes that one could conduct. They are:

• Hypothesis test for testing that all of the slope parameters are 0.
• Hypothesis test for testing that a subset — more than one, but not all — of the slope parameters are 0.
• Hypothesis test for testing that one slope parameter is 0.

We have learned how to perform each of the above three hypothesis tests. Along the way, we also took two detours — one to learn about the " general linear F-test " and one to learn about " sequential sums of squares. " As you now know, knowledge about both is necessary for performing the three hypothesis tests.

The F -statistic and associated p -value in the ANOVA table is used for testing whether all of the slope parameters are 0. In most applications, this p -value will be small enough to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that at least one predictor is useful in the model. For example, for the rabbit heart attacks study, the F -statistic is (0.95927/(4–1)) / (0.54491/(32–4)) = 16.43 with p -value 0.000.

To test whether a subset — more than one, but not all — of the slope parameters are 0, there are two equivalent ways to calculate the F-statistic:

• Use the general linear F-test formula by fitting the full model to find SSE(F) and fitting the reduced model to find SSE(R) . Then the numerator of the F-statistic is (SSE(R) – SSE(F)) / ( \(df_{R}\) – \(df_{F}\)) .
• Alternatively, use the partial F-test formula by fitting only the full model but making sure the relevant predictors are fitted last and "sequential sums of squares" have been selected. Then the numerator of the F-statistic is the sum of the relevant sequential sums of squares divided by the sum of the degrees of freedom for these sequential sums of squares. The denominator of the F -statistic is the mean squared error in the ANOVA table.

For example, for the rabbit heart attacks study, the general linear F-statistic is ((0.8793 – 0.54491) / (30 – 28)) / (0.54491 / 28) = 8.59 with p -value 0.0012. Alternatively, the partial F -statistic for testing the slope parameters for predictors \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) using sequential sums of squares is ((0.31453 + 0.01981) / 2) / (0.54491 / 28) = 8.59.

To test whether one slope parameter is 0, we can use an F -test as just described. Alternatively, we can use a t -test, which will have an identical p -value since in this case, the square of the t -statistic is equal to the F -statistic. For example, for the rabbit heart attacks study, the F -statistic for testing the slope parameter for the Area predictor is (0.63742/1) / (0.54491/(32–4)) = 32.75 with p -value 0.000. Alternatively, the t -statistic for testing the slope parameter for the Area predictor is 0.613 / 0.107 = 5.72 with p -value 0.000, and \(5.72^{2} = 32.72\).

Incidentally, you may be wondering why we can't just do a series of individual t-tests to test whether a subset of the slope parameters is 0. For example, for the rabbit heart attacks study, we could have done the following:

• Fit the model of y = InfSize on \(x_{1}\) = Area and \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) and use an individual t-test for \(x_{3}\).
• If the test results indicate that we can drop \(x_{3}\) then fit the model of y = InfSize on \(x_{1}\) = Area and \(x_{2}\) and use an individual t-test for \(x_{2}\).

The problem with this approach is we're using two individual t-tests instead of one F-test, which means our chance of drawing an incorrect conclusion in our testing procedure is higher. Every time we do a hypothesis test, we can draw an incorrect conclusion by:

• rejecting a true null hypothesis, i.e., make a type I error by concluding the tested predictor(s) should be retained in the model when in truth it/they should be dropped; or
• failing to reject a false null hypothesis, i.e., make a type II error by concluding the tested predictor(s) should be dropped from the model when in truth it/they should be retained.

Thus, in general, the fewer tests we perform the better. In this case, this means that wherever possible using one F-test in place of multiple individual t-tests is preferable.

Hypothesis tests for the slope parameters Section  

The problems in this section are designed to review the hypothesis tests for the slope parameters, as well as to give you some practice on models with a three-group qualitative variable (which we'll cover in more detail in Lesson 8). We consider tests for:

• whether one slope parameter is 0 (for example, \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{1} = 0 \))
• whether a subset (more than one but less than all) of the slope parameters are 0 (for example, \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{2} = \beta_{3} = 0 \) against the alternative \(H_{A} \colon \beta_{2} \ne 0 \) or \(\beta_{3} \ne 0 \) or both ≠ 0)
• whether all of the slope parameters are 0 (for example, \(H_{0} \colon \beta_{1} = \beta_{2} = \beta_{3}\) = 0 against the alternative \(H_{A} \colon \) at least one of the \(\beta_{i}\) is not 0)

(Note the correct specification of the alternative hypotheses for the last two situations.)

Sugar beets study

A group of researchers was interested in studying the effects of three different growth regulators ( treat , denoted 1, 2, and 3) on the yield of sugar beets (y = yield , in pounds). They planned to plant the beets in 30 different plots and then randomly treat 10 plots with the first growth regulator, 10 plots with the second growth regulator, and 10 plots with the third growth regulator. One problem, though, is that the amount of available nitrogen in the 30 different plots varies naturally, thereby giving a potentially unfair advantage to plots with higher levels of available nitrogen. Therefore, the researchers also measured and recorded the available nitrogen (\(x_{1}\) = nit , in pounds/acre) in each plot. They are interested in comparing the mean yields of sugar beets subjected to the different growth regulators after taking into account the available nitrogen. The Sugar Beets dataset contains the data from the researcher's experiment.

Preliminary Work

The plot shows a similar positive linear trend within each treatment category, which suggests that it is reasonable to formulate a multiple regression model that would place three parallel lines through the data.

Because the qualitative variable treat distinguishes between the three treatment groups (1, 2, and 3), we need to create two indicator variables, \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\), say, to fit a linear regression model to these data. The new indicator variables should be defined as follows:

Use Minitab's Calc >> Make Indicator Variables command to create the new indicator variables in your worksheet

Minitab creates an indicator variable for each treatment group but we can only use two, for treatment groups 1 and 2 in this case (treatment group 3 is the reference level in this case).

Then, if we assume the trend in the data can be summarized by this regression model:

\(y_{i} = \beta_{0}\) + \(\beta_{1}\)\(x_{1}\) + \(\beta_{2}\)\(x_{2}\) + \(\beta_{3}\)\(x_{3}\) + \(\epsilon_{i}\)

where \(x_{1}\) = nit and \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) are defined as above, what is the mean response function for plots receiving treatment 3? for plots receiving treatment 1? for plots receiving treatment 2? Are the three regression lines that arise from our formulated model parallel? What does the parameter \(\beta_{2}\) quantify? And, what does the parameter \(\beta_{3}\) quantify?

The fitted equation from Minitab is Yield = 84.99 + 1.3088 Nit - 2.43 \(x_{2}\) - 2.35 \(x_{3}\), which means that the equations for each treatment group are:

• Group 1: Yield = 84.99 + 1.3088 Nit - 2.43(1) = 82.56 + 1.3088 Nit
• Group 2: Yield = 84.99 + 1.3088 Nit - 2.35(1) = 82.64 + 1.3088 Nit
• Group 3: Yield = 84.99 + 1.3088 Nit

The three estimated regression lines are parallel since they have the same slope, 1.3088.

The regression parameter for \(x_{2}\) represents the difference between the estimated intercept for treatment 1 and the estimated intercept for reference treatment 3.

The regression parameter for \(x_{3}\) represents the difference between the estimated intercept for treatment 2 and the estimated intercept for reference treatment 3.

Testing whether all of the slope parameters are 0

\(H_0 \colon \beta_1 = \beta_2 = \beta_3 = 0\) against the alternative \(H_A \colon \) at least one of the \(\beta_i\) is not 0.

\(F=\dfrac{SSR(X_1,X_2,X_3)\div3}{SSE(X_1,X_2,X_3)\div(n-4)}=\dfrac{MSR(X_1,X_2,X_3)}{MSE(X_1,X_2,X_3)}\)

\(F = \dfrac{\frac{16039.5}{3}}{\frac{1078.0}{30-4}} = \dfrac{5346.5}{41.46} = 128.95\)

Since the p -value for this F -statistic is reported as 0.000, we reject \(H_{0}\) in favor of \(H_{A}\) and conclude that at least one of the slope parameters is not zero, i.e., the regression model containing at least one predictor is useful in predicting the size of sugar beet yield.

Tests for whether one slope parameter is 0

\(H_0 \colon \beta_1= 0\) against the alternative \(H_A \colon \beta_1 \ne 0\)

t -statistic = 19.60, p -value = 0.000, so we reject \(H_{0}\) in favor of \(H_{A}\) and conclude that the slope parameter for \(x_{1}\) = nit is not zero, i.e., sugar beet yield is significantly linearly related to the available nitrogen (controlling for treatment).

\(F=\dfrac{SSR(X_1|X_2,X_3)\div1}{SSE(X_1,X_2,X_3)\div(n-4)}=\dfrac{MSR(X_1|X_2,X_3)}{MSE(X_1,X_2,X_3)}\)

Use the Minitab output to calculate the value of this F statistic. Does the value you obtain equal \(t^{2}\), the square of the t -statistic as we might expect?

\(F-statistic= \dfrac{\frac{15934.5}{1}}{\frac{1078.0}{30-4}} = \dfrac{15934.5}{41.46} = 384.32\), which is the same as \(19.60^{2}\).

Because \(t^{2}\) will equal the partial F -statistic whenever you test for whether one slope parameter is 0, it makes sense to just use the t -statistic and P -value that Minitab displays as a default. But, note that we've just learned something new about the meaning of the t -test in the multiple regression setting. It tests for the ("marginal") significance of the \(x_{1}\) predictor after \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) have already been taken into account.

Tests for whether a subset of the slope parameters is 0

\(H_0 \colon \beta_2=\beta_3= 0\) against the alternative \(H_A \colon \beta_2 \ne 0\) or \(\beta_3 \ne 0\) or both \(\ne 0\).

\(F=\dfrac{SSR(X_2,X_3|X_1)\div2}{SSE(X_1,X_2,X_3)\div(n-4)}=\dfrac{MSR(X_2,X_3|X_1)}{MSE(X_1,X_2,X_3)}\)

\(F = \dfrac{\frac{10.4+27.5}{2}}{\frac{1078.0}{30-4}} = \dfrac{18.95}{41.46} = 0.46\).

F distribution with 2 DF in Numerator and 26 DF in denominator

p-value \(= 1-0.363677 = 0.636\), so we fail to reject \(H_{0}\) in favor of \(H_{A}\) and conclude that we cannot rule out \(\beta_2 = \beta_3 = 0\), i.e., there is no significant difference in the mean yields of sugar beets subjected to the different growth regulators after taking into account the available nitrogen.

Note that the sequential mean square due to regression, MSR(\(X_{2}\),\(X_{3}\)|\(X_{1}\)), is obtained by dividing the sequential sum of square by its degrees of freedom (2, in this case, since two additional predictors \(X_{2}\) and \(X_{3}\) are considered). Use the Minitab output to calculate the value of this F statistic, and use Minitab to get the associated P -value. Answer the researcher's question at the \(\alpha= 0.05\) level.