Doing that one-sample t-test on the ratio is not a bad idea.
But it is not a new idea, either. It is, precisely, 100% identical to
doing a repeated measures test on the logarithm of the raw numbers.
Which is the same as the paired t-test.
On 2 Apr 2001 11:53:11 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr
Graham D Smith) wrote:
> I would like to start a discussion on a family of procedures
> that tend not to be emphasised in the literature. The procedures
> I have in mind are based upon the ratio between two sets of
> scores from the same sample.
[ ... snip, detail ]
> My feeling is that the t test for ratios should have a similar
> status and profile as the repeated measures t test (on
> differences). I suspect that the t test for differences is often
> used when the t test for ratios would be more suitable. So
> why is the procedure not more widely used? Perhaps this
> is only a problem within psychology where ratio level data
> is not commonly used.
[ snip, rest ]
Logarithms (if that is what is appropriate) is a more general start
to a model. Building directly on ratios is not as convenient.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
