The recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders is 15%. A warden suspects that this percent is different if the sex offender is also a drug addict. Of the 329 convicted sex offenders who were also drug addicts, 43 of them became repeat offenders. What can be concluded at the α = 0.10 level of significance? For this study, we should use The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: (please enter a decimal) H1: (Please enter a decimal) The test statistic = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) The p-value is α Based on this, we should the null hypothesis. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 15% at α = 0.10, so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 15% at α = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%. The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly different from 15% at α = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.

MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications

6th Edition

ISBN:9781119256830

Author:Amos Gilat

Publisher:Amos Gilat

Chapter1: Starting With Matlab

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1P

See similar textbooks

Related questions

Question

The recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders is 15%. A warden suspects that this percent is different if the sex offender is also a drug addict. Of the 329 convicted sex offenders who were also drug addicts, 43 of them became repeat offenders. What can be concluded at the α = 0.10 level of significance?

For this study, we should use
The null and alternative hypotheses would be:
Ho: (please enter a decimal)
H₁: (Please enter a decimal)

The test statistic = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)
The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)
The p-value is α
Based on this, we should the null hypothesis.
Thus, the final conclusion is that ...
- The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 15% at α = 0.10, so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
- The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 15% at α = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%.
- The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly different from 15% at α = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
Interpret the p-value in the context of the study.
- There is a 32.68% chance that the percent of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders differs from 15%.
- If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 32.68% chance that either fewer than 13% of the 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders or more than 17% of the 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders.
- There is a 32.68% chance of a Type I error.
- If the sample proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 13% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 32.68% chance that we would conclude either fewer than 15% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders or more than 15% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders.
Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study.
- If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
- There is a 10% chance that Lizard People aka "Reptilians" are running the world.
- There is a 10% chance that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
- If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%.

The recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders is 15%. A warden suspects that this percent is different if
the sex offender is also a drug addict. Of the 329 convicted sex offenders who were also drug addicts, 43 of
them became repeat offenders. What can be concluded at the a = 0.10 level of significance?
%3D
a. For this study, we should use Select an answer
b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be:
Ho: ? v| Select an answer
(please enter a decimal)
H1: ? v Select an answer v
(Please enter a decimal)
c. The test statistic ? v =
(please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)
d. The p-value
(Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)
%3D
e. The p-value is ? v a
f. Based on this, we should Select an answer v the null hypothesis.
g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ...
O The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 15% at a =
so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of
convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
0.10,
The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 15% at a = 0.10,
so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of
convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%.
The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly different from 15% at a = 0.10, so
there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of
convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
h. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study.
O There is a 32.68% chance that the percent of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become
repeat offenders differs from 15%.
O If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat
offenders is 15% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then
there would be a 32.68% chance that either fewer than 13% of the 329 convicted sex offender
drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders or more than 17% of the 329 convicted sex
offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders.
There is a 32.68% chance of a Type I error.
O If the sample proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders
is 13% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would
be a 32.68% chance that we would conclude either fewer than 15% of all convicted sex
offender drug addicts become repeat offenders or more than 15% of all convicted sex offender
drug addicts become repeat offenders.
i. Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study.
O If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat
offenders is 15% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then
there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of
all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
There is a 10% chance that Lizard People aka "Reptilians" are running the world.
There is a 10% chance that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who
become repeat offenders is different from 15%.
O If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat
offenders is different from 15% and if another 329 convicted sex offender drug addicts are
observed then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the
proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to
15%.

Expert Solution

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 3 images

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here