In this demonstration, you use a flow with the t-Tests node to test whether the population mean donation amount is $100 given the information in the PVA_DONORS table.
Reminder: If you restarted your SAS session, or it has timed out due to inactivity, you must re-create the course libraries, LOCALLIB and VST. To do this, run the AssignLibrary flow.
The mean donation amount is $101.60, and the associated t statistic value is 4.44. The p-value is <0.0001. Assuming a significance level of 5% (that is, alpha=0.05), you find that the p-value is less than alpha. Thus, you reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the hypothesized population mean donation amount of $100 is significantly different from the sample mean of $101.60. Scroll further to examine the confidence interval plot. It is a horizontal line ranging from 100.9 to 102.4 to graphically represent the 95% confidence interval around the mean estimate of the donation amount.
Notice the vertical reference line drawn at 100 (the hypothesized value). This reference line lies outside the confidence limit, which clearly indicates that the mean value in the sample is statistically different from $100 at an alpha level of 0.05.
Next, the histogram and the q-q plot for donation amount do not show any severe departures from normality although there are some potential outliers present in the data. Therefore, the Student's t test is valid.
At this point, your brain might be struggling to accept whether a difference of $1.60 between the hypothesized value and the sample mean is significant when the Donation_Amt variable ranges from $0 to $211.9. Well, the interpretation that you just made from the t-test is based on the data in hand and the significance level chosen. Recall our discussion on the over-reliance on the arbitrary cutoff of a 5% significance level and the sample size. In inferential statistics the 5% level of significance might work well given the sample size. However, in a big data context, it is not always appropriate. Large sample sizes result in smaller p-values, and in that case, you tend to reject the null hypothesis almost every time. Thus, you better select a very small significance level cutoff when using the p-value approach in the big data world. In this example, we have a significantly large data set (from a statistical perspective) with 4843 observations. Thus, using a 5% level of significance is highly likely to produce some statistically significant results.
Let's see the impact of using a smaller significance level cutoff on the inference that we draw and the confidence intervals.
proc ttest data=VST.PVA_DONORS sides=2 h0=100 plots(only showh0)=
(summaryPlot intervalPlot qqplot) alpha=0.000001;
var Donation_Amt;
run;
Note that neither the t statistic value nor the corresponding p-values have changed in comparison to previous run results. What changes is the confidence interval for the mean donation amount and the statistical inference.

Now you see that the 99.9999% confidence limit values for the mean range from 99.83 to 103.4, which clearly includes the hypothesized value within it. The same interpretation can be drawn from the confidence intervals plot. You see that the reference line at $100 is contained within the confidence limit. Thus, you would reach the conclusion that the mean donation amount is not statistically different from $100.
Note that there is nothing special about considering a significance level of 5% always. It should depend on the problem that you are studying and the sample size.