Want to double check my answer Intrigued by a 2013 sdy at the University of Nebraska that suggested marijuana smokers may be thinner than otheradults, a group of students did a project to explore the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and amount of timespent under the influence of marijuana (measured in hours per week). Based on a random sample of 33 students at theiruniversity, they used BMI as the response variable. The equation of the least-squares regression line is: hours per monthunder influence = 49.2 - 1.15 BMI. Also, r = 0.134.Body Mass and Smoking Habitsterms of usecontact uscafeersprivacy policy7-52 PMabout usC 11/20/2020a%23hpprt scinsertt1019peqMarijuana40 BMIHow effective is the regression model for these data?O extremely effective, because 13.4 % of the variation in the data is explained by the modelnot effective, because only 36.6 % of the variation in the data is explained by the modelnot effective, because only 13.4 % of the variation in the data is explained by the modelextremely effective, because 36.6 % of the variation in the data is explained by the modelontacfeloPhvacy policy tems cse1:52 PMabout uscarcers11/20/2020hpinsert12f10f914417f6 10Po

Name: Want to double check my answer Intrigued by a 2013 sdy at the Universi
Uploaded: 2024-03-20T07:06:41.000Z
Channel: Bartleby
Description: Want to double check my answer Intrigued by a 2013 sdy at the University of Nebraska that suggested marijuana smokers may be thinner than otheradults, a group of students did a project to explore the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and amo

Here r2 = 0.134r2 value tells us how much of the variation is explained by the model , it ranges from 0 to 1 or in percentage terms from 0 to 100 Here the r2 is 0.134 or 13.4% This implies that only 13.4% variation is explained by the given model which is considered very low. For a model to be extremely effective, the value r2 should be greater than 0.9 , for medium effectiveness it should be between 0.7 and 0.9 , and values below 0.7 the effectiveness is very low. So here Option : Not effective because only 13.4 % variation is explained by the model is correct