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›Two-Proportion z-Test
Hypothesis test

Two-Proportion z-Test

Also known as: z-test for proportions, two-sample proportion test, one-proportion z-test, Oran Testi — z Testi (Oranlar)

The proportion test (z-test for proportions) is a parametric hypothesis test that compares one or two sample proportions against a reference value or each other. Grounded in the large-sample normal approximation formalized by Fleiss, Levin, and Paik (2003), it is the standard tool for binary outcome comparisons when samples are large enough for the central limit theorem to apply.

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.

Proportion Test
Binomial TestChi-square testIndependent t-testLogistic RegressionAttributes Control Chart

When to use it

Use this test when your outcome variable is binary (e.g., success/failure, yes/no) and you want to compare the proportion of successes between two independent groups, or test whether a single group's proportion matches a known reference. Three assumptions must hold: observations are independent, each group is large enough that np ≥ 5 and n(1−p) ≥ 5 (so the normal approximation is valid), and in the two-group case the two groups are independent of each other. For small samples or rare events, use the exact binomial test or Fisher's exact test instead.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Straightforward to interpret: the output is a familiar z-score and p-value.
  • Naturally supports one-tailed (directional) hypotheses, making it ideal for power analysis when planning studies with a predicted direction.
  • Algebraically equivalent to the chi-square test for a 2×2 table, so it is consistent with the broader cross-tabulation literature.
  • Cohen's h provides a meaningful, variance-stabilized effect size for planning and reporting.
Limitations
  • Requires large samples; the normal approximation breaks down when np or n(1−p) is below 5.
  • Sensitive to unequal group sizes when proportions are far from 0.5.
  • Cannot extend directly to more than two groups; multiple comparisons require adjustment.

Frequently asked

When should I use Fisher's exact test instead?

Use Fisher's exact test when any expected cell count falls below 5, which typically happens with small total samples or very rare outcomes. Fisher's test makes no normal approximation and is exact regardless of sample size. The proportion z-test and its chi-square equivalent are appropriate when all expected counts are at least 5.

Is this the same as the chi-square test?

For a 2×2 contingency table the two-proportion z-test and the Pearson chi-square test are algebraically equivalent: z² equals the chi-square statistic. The z-test is preferred when you want to specify a directional (one-tailed) hypothesis or when you need a signed test statistic for power calculations, while chi-square is more natural for multi-cell tables.

What effect size should I report?

The recommended effect size is Cohen's h, computed as the difference of the arcsine-transformed proportions: h = 2 arcsin(√p₁) − 2 arcsin(√p₂). The arcsine transformation stabilizes the variance of proportions across the 0–1 range. Conventionally, |h| ≈ 0.2 is small, 0.5 is medium, and 0.8 is large. Always report the raw proportion difference and its confidence interval alongside h.

Can I test a single proportion against a known value?

Yes. The one-proportion z-test compares a single observed proportion p̂ against a hypothesized value p₀. The z statistic becomes (p̂ − p₀) / √(p₀(1 − p₀) / n). The same sample-size condition applies: np₀ ≥ 5 and n(1 − p₀) ≥ 5.

Sources

  1. Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003). Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions (3rd ed.). Wiley. DOI: 10.1002/0471445428 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 1). Two-Proportion z-Test. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/statistics/proportion-test

Related methods

Binomial TestChi-square testIndependent t-testLogistic Regression

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.

  • Binomial TestStatistics↔ compare
  • Chi-square testStatistics↔ compare
  • Independent t-testStatistics↔ compare
  • Logistic RegressionResearch Statistics↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Attributes Control ChartBinomial Test

Similar methods

Binomial TestPower Analysis for ProportionsFisher's exact testChi-square testChi-square goodness-of-fit testBarnard's Exact TestA/B TestIndependent samples t-test

Related reference concepts

Chi-Squared and Fisher Exact TestsHypothesis Testing FrameworkStatistical Hypothesis TestingStatistical Power and Sample SizeCategorical Data AnalysisStatistical Estimation and Inference

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

ScholarGate — Proportion Test (Two-Proportion z-Test). Retrieved 2026-07-20 from https://scholargate.app/en/statistics/proportion-test · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Karl Pearson / classical large-sample z approximation
Year
1900
Family
Hypothesis test
Type
Parametric proportion comparison
Groups
1 or 2
Outcome
binary / count
Parametric
Yes
Distribution
Standard normal (z)
MinSamplePerCell
np ≥ 5 and n(1−p) ≥ 5
Difficulty
1
Related methods
Binomial TestChi-square testIndependent t-testLogistic Regression
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