Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Statistics›Power Analysis for the t-test
Hypothesis test

Power Analysis for the t-test

Statistical Power Analysis for the t-test · Also known as: t-test power analysis, sample size calculation for t-test, Güç Analizi — t-Testi

Power analysis for the t-test is a sample size planning procedure that determines how many participants are required to detect a mean difference of a given magnitude with acceptable probability. Formalised by Jacob Cohen in his 1969 and 1988 editions of Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, it links four quantities — effect size (Cohen's d), significance level (α), statistical power (1 − β), and sample size — so that fixing any three allows calculation of the fourth.

ScholarGate
  1. Hypothesis test
  2. v1
  3. 1 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Power Analysis for t-test
Independent t-testPaired t-testPower Analysis for ANOVAPower Analysis for Regre…Welch t-testEquivalence / Non-Inferi…Simulation-Based Power A…Survival Analysis Power…

When to use it

Use this procedure when planning any study that will be analysed with an independent-samples or paired t-test. The two key assumptions are that you can estimate Cohen's d from prior literature or a pilot study, and that you have fixed your significance level in advance (typically 0.05). No normality requirement is imposed on the power calculation itself, though the t-test it plans for does require approximately normal data or a sufficiently large sample.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Provides a principled, quantitative justification for sample size decisions before data collection.
  • Directly reduces the risk of underpowered studies, which are a major source of non-replicable findings.
  • Sensitivity analysis across a range of plausible d values takes only seconds and reveals how robust the design is to effect-size uncertainty.
  • Widely accepted by ethics boards, grant agencies, and journal editors as a methodological prerequisite.
Limitations
  • The result is only as accurate as the effect-size estimate; an unrealistic d yields a misleading sample size.
  • Does not account for attrition, missing data, or complex designs — the calculated n is a minimum for the simple two-group case.
  • Post-hoc power computed from the observed effect size is circular and should not be used to interpret a non-significant result.

Frequently asked

What value of Cohen's d should I use?

Use the smallest effect you consider practically meaningful, derived from prior literature or a well-conducted pilot study. Cohen's conventional benchmarks (d = 0.2 small, 0.5 medium, 0.8 large) are starting points only; the most defensible approach is to justify the chosen d from domain knowledge.

Why is 0.80 the conventional power target?

Cohen (1988) proposed 0.80 as a pragmatic balance between sample cost and the risk of a false negative, noting that it implies a 4:1 ratio of β to α errors. It is a convention, not a law — high-stakes applications routinely require 0.90 or 0.95.

Can I run power analysis after collecting data?

Post-hoc power computed from the observed effect size is circular and uninformative: a non-significant result will always appear to have low power, adding no new information. For interpreting a non-significant result, report a confidence interval and consider equivalence testing instead.

Does this apply to both independent and paired t-tests?

Yes. For the paired t-test, d is computed from the mean difference and the standard deviation of differences, and only one sample size is needed rather than two. The statwise tool covers both variants.

Sources

  1. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 978-0805802832

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 1). Statistical Power Analysis for the t-test. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/statistics/power-analysis-ttest

Related methods

Independent t-testPaired t-testPower Analysis for ANOVAPower Analysis for RegressionWelch t-test

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Independent t-testStatistics↔ compare
  • Paired t-testStatistics↔ compare
  • Power Analysis for ANOVAStatistics↔ compare
  • Power Analysis for RegressionStatistics↔ compare
  • Welch t-testStatistics↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Equivalence / Non-Inferiority TrialPower Analysis for ANOVAPower Analysis for RegressionSimulation-Based Power AnalysisSurvival Analysis Power Analysis

Similar methods

Power analysisStatistical Power and Sample SizeCorrelation Power AnalysisPower Analysis for ANOVAPower Analysis for RegressionPower Analysis for ProportionsEffect SizeChi-Square Power Analysis

Related reference concepts

Statistical Power and Sample SizeSample Size CalculationType I and Type II ErrorsHypothesis Testing FrameworkStudy Design and Sample Size PlanningEffect Size

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Power Analysis for t-test (Statistical Power Analysis for the t-test). Retrieved 2026-07-20 from https://scholargate.app/en/statistics/power-analysis-ttest · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Jacob Cohen
Year
1969
Family
Power analysis
Type
Sample size determination
EffectSizeMeasure
Cohen's d
TypicalAlpha
0.05
TypicalPower
0.8
Parametric
Yes
Distribution
Non-central t
Related methods
Independent t-testPaired t-testPower Analysis for ANOVAPower Analysis for RegressionWelch t-test
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account