data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/70d8c/70d8cc6a0d8c3eb818369dc3ab941c7e5c0ed03b" alt="BASIC PRACTICE OF STATS-LL W/SAPLINGPLU"
(a)
To test: Whether there is any statistically significant evidence at the
(a)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2698b/2698b129880c27e76a91019c9f73226195062b2d" alt="Check Mark"
Answer to Problem 17.38E
There is statistically significant difference at
Explanation of Solution
Given info:
The data represents the sample of strength of pieces of wood and standard deviation 3,000 pounds.
Calculation:
STATE:
The strength of pieces of wood follows
PLAN:
Parameter:
Define the parameter
The hypotheses are given below:
The claim of the problem is the mean strength is different from 32,500.
Null Hypothesis:
That is, the mean strength is equal to 32,500.
Alternative hypothesis:
That is, the mean strength is not equal to 32,500.
SOLVE:
Conditions for valid test:
A sample of 20 pieces of wood is randomly selected and strength of pieces of wood follows normal distribution with standard deviation
Test statistic and P-value:
Software procedure:
Step-by-step procedure to obtain test statistic and P-value using the MINITAB software:
- Choose Stat > Basic Statistics > 1-Sample Z.
- In Samples in Column, enter the column of Strength of pieces.
- In Standard deviation, enter 3,000.
- In Perform hypothesis test, enter the test mean as 32,500.
- Check Options, enter Confidence level as 90.
- Choose not equal in alternative.
- Click OK in all dialogue boxes.
Output using the MINITAB software is given below:
From the MINITAB output, the test statistic is –2.47 and the P-value is 0.013.
Decision criteria for the P-value method:
If
If
CONCLUDE:
Use a significance level,
Here, P-value is 0.013, which is lesser than the value of
That is,
Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.
Thus, there is statistically significant at
(b)
To test: Whether there is any statistically significant evidence at the
(b)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2698b/2698b129880c27e76a91019c9f73226195062b2d" alt="Check Mark"
Answer to Problem 17.38E
There is no statistically significant difference at
Explanation of Solution
Calculation:
STATE:
Is there statistically significant evidence at the
PLAN:
Parameter:
Define the parameter
The hypotheses are given below:
The claim of the problem is the mean strength is different from 31,500.
Null Hypothesis:
That is, the mean strength is equal to 31,500.
Alternative hypothesis:
That is, the mean strength is not equal to 31,500.
SOLVE:
Conditions for valid test:
A sample of 20 pieces of wood is randomly selected and strength of pieces of wood follows normal distribution with standard deviation
Test statistic and P-value:
Software procedure:
Step-by-step procedure to obtain test statistic and P-value using the MINITAB software:
- Choose Stat > Basic Statistics > 1-Sample Z.
- In Samples in Column, enter the column of Strength of pieces.
- In Standard deviation, enter 3,000.
- In Perform hypothesis test, enter the test mean as 31,500.
- Check Options, enter Confidence level as 90.
- Choose not equal in alternative.
- Click OK in all dialogue boxes.
Output using the MINITAB software is given below:
From the MINITAB output, the test statistic is –0.98 and the P-value is 0.326.
CONCLUDE:
Use a significance level,
Here, P-value is 0.326, which is greater than the value of
That is,
Therefore, the null hypothesis is not rejected.
Thus, there is no statistically significant difference at
Want to see more full solutions like this?
Chapter 17 Solutions
BASIC PRACTICE OF STATS-LL W/SAPLINGPLU
- Compute the relative risk of falling for the two groups (did not stop walking vs. did stop). State/interpret your result verbally.arrow_forwardMicrosoft Excel include formulasarrow_forwardQuestion 1 The data shown in Table 1 are and R values for 24 samples of size n = 5 taken from a process producing bearings. The measurements are made on the inside diameter of the bearing, with only the last three decimals recorded (i.e., 34.5 should be 0.50345). Table 1: Bearing Diameter Data Sample Number I R Sample Number I R 1 34.5 3 13 35.4 8 2 34.2 4 14 34.0 6 3 31.6 4 15 37.1 5 4 31.5 4 16 34.9 7 5 35.0 5 17 33.5 4 6 34.1 6 18 31.7 3 7 32.6 4 19 34.0 8 8 33.8 3 20 35.1 9 34.8 7 21 33.7 2 10 33.6 8 22 32.8 1 11 31.9 3 23 33.5 3 12 38.6 9 24 34.2 2 (a) Set up and R charts on this process. Does the process seem to be in statistical control? If necessary, revise the trial control limits. [15 pts] (b) If specifications on this diameter are 0.5030±0.0010, find the percentage of nonconforming bearings pro- duced by this process. Assume that diameter is normally distributed. [10 pts] 1arrow_forward
- 4. (5 pts) Conduct a chi-square contingency test (test of independence) to assess whether there is an association between the behavior of the elderly person (did not stop to talk, did stop to talk) and their likelihood of falling. Below, please state your null and alternative hypotheses, calculate your expected values and write them in the table, compute the test statistic, test the null by comparing your test statistic to the critical value in Table A (p. 713-714) of your textbook and/or estimating the P-value, and provide your conclusions in written form. Make sure to show your work. Did not stop walking to talk Stopped walking to talk Suffered a fall 12 11 Totals 23 Did not suffer a fall | 2 Totals 35 37 14 46 60 Tarrow_forwardQuestion 2 Parts manufactured by an injection molding process are subjected to a compressive strength test. Twenty samples of five parts each are collected, and the compressive strengths (in psi) are shown in Table 2. Table 2: Strength Data for Question 2 Sample Number x1 x2 23 x4 x5 R 1 83.0 2 88.6 78.3 78.8 3 85.7 75.8 84.3 81.2 78.7 75.7 77.0 71.0 84.2 81.0 79.1 7.3 80.2 17.6 75.2 80.4 10.4 4 80.8 74.4 82.5 74.1 75.7 77.5 8.4 5 83.4 78.4 82.6 78.2 78.9 80.3 5.2 File Preview 6 75.3 79.9 87.3 89.7 81.8 82.8 14.5 7 74.5 78.0 80.8 73.4 79.7 77.3 7.4 8 79.2 84.4 81.5 86.0 74.5 81.1 11.4 9 80.5 86.2 76.2 64.1 80.2 81.4 9.9 10 75.7 75.2 71.1 82.1 74.3 75.7 10.9 11 80.0 81.5 78.4 73.8 78.1 78.4 7.7 12 80.6 81.8 79.3 73.8 81.7 79.4 8.0 13 82.7 81.3 79.1 82.0 79.5 80.9 3.6 14 79.2 74.9 78.6 77.7 75.3 77.1 4.3 15 85.5 82.1 82.8 73.4 71.7 79.1 13.8 16 78.8 79.6 80.2 79.1 80.8 79.7 2.0 17 82.1 78.2 18 84.5 76.9 75.5 83.5 81.2 19 79.0 77.8 20 84.5 73.1 78.2 82.1 79.2 81.1 7.6 81.2 84.4 81.6 80.8…arrow_forwardName: Lab Time: Quiz 7 & 8 (Take Home) - due Wednesday, Feb. 26 Contingency Analysis (Ch. 9) In lab 5, part 3, you will create a mosaic plot and conducted a chi-square contingency test to evaluate whether elderly patients who did not stop walking to talk (vs. those who did stop) were more likely to suffer a fall in the next six months. I have tabulated the data below. Answer the questions below. Please show your calculations on this or a separate sheet. Did not stop walking to talk Stopped walking to talk Totals Suffered a fall Did not suffer a fall Totals 12 11 23 2 35 37 14 14 46 60 Quiz 7: 1. (2 pts) Compute the odds of falling for each group. Compute the odds ratio for those who did not stop walking vs. those who did stop walking. Interpret your result verbally.arrow_forward
- Solve please and thank you!arrow_forward7. In a 2011 article, M. Radelet and G. Pierce reported a logistic prediction equation for the death penalty verdicts in North Carolina. Let Y denote whether a subject convicted of murder received the death penalty (1=yes), for the defendant's race h (h1, black; h = 2, white), victim's race i (i = 1, black; i = 2, white), and number of additional factors j (j = 0, 1, 2). For the model logit[P(Y = 1)] = a + ß₁₂ + By + B²², they reported = -5.26, D â BD = 0, BD = 0.17, BY = 0, BY = 0.91, B = 0, B = 2.02, B = 3.98. (a) Estimate the probability of receiving the death penalty for the group most likely to receive it. [4 pts] (b) If, instead, parameters used constraints 3D = BY = 35 = 0, report the esti- mates. [3 pts] h (c) If, instead, parameters used constraints Σ₁ = Σ₁ BY = Σ; B = 0, report the estimates. [3 pts] Hint the probabilities, odds and odds ratios do not change with constraints.arrow_forwardSolve please and thank you!arrow_forward
- Solve please and thank you!arrow_forwardQuestion 1:We want to evaluate the impact on the monetary economy for a company of two types of strategy (competitive strategy, cooperative strategy) adopted by buyers.Competitive strategy: strategy characterized by firm behavior aimed at obtaining concessions from the buyer.Cooperative strategy: a strategy based on a problem-solving negotiating attitude, with a high level of trust and cooperation.A random sample of 17 buyers took part in a negotiation experiment in which 9 buyers adopted the competitive strategy, and the other 8 the cooperative strategy. The savings obtained for each group of buyers are presented in the pdf that i sent: For this problem, we assume that the samples are random and come from two normal populations of unknown but equal variances.According to the theory, the average saving of buyers adopting a competitive strategy will be lower than that of buyers adopting a cooperative strategy.a) Specify the population identifications and the hypotheses H0 and H1…arrow_forwardYou assume that the annual incomes for certain workers are normal with a mean of $28,500 and a standard deviation of $2,400. What’s the chance that a randomly selected employee makes more than $30,000?What’s the chance that 36 randomly selected employees make more than $30,000, on average?arrow_forward
- MATLAB: An Introduction with ApplicationsStatisticsISBN:9781119256830Author:Amos GilatPublisher:John Wiley & Sons IncProbability and Statistics for Engineering and th...StatisticsISBN:9781305251809Author:Jay L. DevorePublisher:Cengage LearningStatistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C...StatisticsISBN:9781305504912Author:Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. WallnauPublisher:Cengage Learning
- Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E...StatisticsISBN:9780134683416Author:Ron Larson, Betsy FarberPublisher:PEARSONThe Basic Practice of StatisticsStatisticsISBN:9781319042578Author:David S. Moore, William I. Notz, Michael A. FlignerPublisher:W. H. FreemanIntroduction to the Practice of StatisticsStatisticsISBN:9781319013387Author:David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, Bruce A. CraigPublisher:W. H. Freeman
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1f13b/1f13bb499eb818f22eaa8f279369806e343a6fd7" alt="Text book image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4d85b/4d85b84538f6c88a8cf7251507bc645117a517f2" alt="Text book image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b504e/b504e1b30ef04b314ba48e56482f4f085ab8749e" alt="Text book image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2c998/2c998b7caafe204b2f67922992b935c0470aee45" alt="Text book image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/519a1/519a14a01cee7808eaa0b7e90a2d431c525cad78" alt="Text book image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/46058/4605849099ed6ed8b02e9feb1f0e1269ed2635a3" alt="Text book image"