Are job applicants with easy to pronounce last names less likely to get called for an interview than applicants with difficult to pronounce last names. 689 job applications were sent out with last names that are easy to pronounce and 764 identical job applications were sent out with names that were difficult to pronounce. 524 of the "applicants" with easy to pronounce names were called for an interview while 610 of the "applicants" with difficult to pronounce names were called for an interview. What can be concluded at the 0.01 level of significance? If the calculator asks, be sure to use the "Not Pooled" data option. For this study, we should use Select an answer a. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer (please enter a decimal) H₁: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer (Please enter a decimal) b. The test statistic? = your answer to 3 decimal places.) c. The p-value = to 4 decimal places.) d. The p-value is ? ✨ a (please show (Please show your answer e. Based on this, we should Select an answer the null hypothesis. f. Thus, the final conclusion is that .... The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 689 applicants with easy to pronounce names who got called for an interview is less than the proportion of the 764 applicants with difficult to pronounce names who got called for an interview. The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so we can conclude that the population proportion of applicants with easy to pronounce names who get called for an interview is equal to the population proportion of applicants with difficult to pronounce names who get called for an interview. The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that applicants with easy to pronounce last names are less likely to get called for an interview compared to applicants with difficult to pronounce last names. The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that among all possible applicants, people with easy to pronounce last names are less likely to get called for an interview compared to people with difficult to pronounce last names. g. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study. There is a 4.1% chance that applicants with easy to pronounce names are 3.8% less likely to receive a callback than applicants with difficult to pronounce names. If the population proportion of callbacks for applicants with easy to pronounce last names is the same as the population proportion of

MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
6th Edition
ISBN:9781119256830
Author:Amos Gilat
Publisher:Amos Gilat
Chapter1: Starting With Matlab
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1P
icon
Related questions
Question
Are job applicants with easy to pronounce last names less
likely to get called for an interview than applicants with
difficult to pronounce last names. 689 job applications were
sent out with last names that are easy to pronounce and
764 identical job applications were sent out with names
that were difficult to pronounce. 524 of the "applicants"
with easy to pronounce names were called for an interview
while 610 of the "applicants" with difficult to pronounce
names were called for an interview. What can be concluded
at the 0.01 level of significance? If the calculator asks, be
sure to use the "Not Pooled" data option.
For this study, we should use
Select an answer
a. The null and alternative hypotheses would be:
Ho: Select an answer
Select an answer
Select an answer (please enter a decimal)
H₁:
Select an answer
Select an answer
Select an answer
(Please enter a decimal)
b. The test statistic? =
your answer to 3 decimal places.)
c. The p-value
=
to 4 decimal places.)
d. The p-value is ? ✨ a
(please show
(Please show your answer
e. Based on this, we should Select an answer the null
hypothesis.
f. Thus, the final conclusion is that
....
The results are statistically significant at a =
0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to
conclude that the proportion of the 689
applicants with easy to pronounce names who
got called for an interview is less than the
proportion of the 764 applicants with difficult
to pronounce names who got called for an
interview.
The results are statistically insignificant at a =
0.01, so we can conclude that the population
proportion of applicants with easy to pronounce
names who get called for an interview is equal
to the population proportion of applicants with
difficult to pronounce names who get called for
an interview.
The results are statistically insignificant at a =
0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to
conclude that applicants with easy to
pronounce last names are less likely to get
called for an interview compared to applicants
with difficult to pronounce last names.
The results are statistically significant at a =
0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to
conclude that among all possible applicants,
people with easy to pronounce last names are
less likely to get called for an interview
compared to people with difficult to pronounce
last names.
g. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study.
There is a 4.1% chance that applicants with
easy to pronounce names are 3.8% less likely to
receive a callback than applicants with difficult
to pronounce names.
If the population proportion of callbacks for
applicants with easy to pronounce last names is
the same as the population proportion of
Transcribed Image Text:Are job applicants with easy to pronounce last names less likely to get called for an interview than applicants with difficult to pronounce last names. 689 job applications were sent out with last names that are easy to pronounce and 764 identical job applications were sent out with names that were difficult to pronounce. 524 of the "applicants" with easy to pronounce names were called for an interview while 610 of the "applicants" with difficult to pronounce names were called for an interview. What can be concluded at the 0.01 level of significance? If the calculator asks, be sure to use the "Not Pooled" data option. For this study, we should use Select an answer a. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer (please enter a decimal) H₁: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer (Please enter a decimal) b. The test statistic? = your answer to 3 decimal places.) c. The p-value = to 4 decimal places.) d. The p-value is ? ✨ a (please show (Please show your answer e. Based on this, we should Select an answer the null hypothesis. f. Thus, the final conclusion is that .... The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 689 applicants with easy to pronounce names who got called for an interview is less than the proportion of the 764 applicants with difficult to pronounce names who got called for an interview. The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so we can conclude that the population proportion of applicants with easy to pronounce names who get called for an interview is equal to the population proportion of applicants with difficult to pronounce names who get called for an interview. The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that applicants with easy to pronounce last names are less likely to get called for an interview compared to applicants with difficult to pronounce last names. The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that among all possible applicants, people with easy to pronounce last names are less likely to get called for an interview compared to people with difficult to pronounce last names. g. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study. There is a 4.1% chance that applicants with easy to pronounce names are 3.8% less likely to receive a callback than applicants with difficult to pronounce names. If the population proportion of callbacks for applicants with easy to pronounce last names is the same as the population proportion of
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 1 images

Blurred answer
Similar questions
  • SEE MORE QUESTIONS
Recommended textbooks for you
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Statistics
ISBN:
9780134683416
Author:
Ron Larson, Betsy Farber
Publisher:
PEARSON
The Basic Practice of Statistics
The Basic Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319042578
Author:
David S. Moore, William I. Notz, Michael A. Fligner
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319013387
Author:
David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, Bruce A. Craig
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman