Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Homework Solutions for Chapter 7: Hypothesis Testing - Prof. Spencer Muse, Assignments of Data Analysis & Statistical Methods

Solutions to homework problems in chapter 7 of a statistics textbook, focusing on hypothesis testing. Topics covered include testing for normal distribution, one-sided and two-sided alternatives, confidence intervals, and the significance of p-values. The document also discusses the importance of large sample sizes and independent groups.

Typology: Assignments

Pre 2010

Uploaded on 03/18/2009

koofers-user-u7q
koofers-user-u7q 🇺🇸

10 documents

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

Related documents


Partial preview of the text

Download Homework Solutions for Chapter 7: Hypothesis Testing - Prof. Spencer Muse and more Assignments Data Analysis & Statistical Methods in PDF only on Docsity! ST 301  Homework 11 Solutions  CH 7  53.) (a) The data can’t be normally distributed because there are only 7 possible values (0‐6), all  integers.  This data actually has a Binomial distribution.  (b) We have two large samples (n1 =165 and n2 = 212), so the sample means will have normal  distributions.  So the methods of this chapter are applicable.  (c) H0: µINTERVENTION = µCONTROL  HA: µINTERVENTION ≠ µCONTROL (two‐sided)  HA: µINTERVENTION > µCONTROL (one‐sided)  The one‐sided alternative would reflect the researcher’s belief that the intervention group should have a  higher mean score.  The two‐sided alternative allows for the possibility that the intervention group has a  lower score than the control.  (d)  . . . . 6.258 .            df = 354 (software) or 164 (approx). Either way, p < 0.0001.  With such a small p‐value, Reject H0.  Conclude that there is a significant difference in mean score  between the intervention group and the control group.  Since the data show that the intervention score  was higher, we can conclude further that the intervention increases mean score over control.  (e) 95% CI:  (xbar1 – xbar2) ± t*SEDIFF = (5.08 – 4.33) ± t* ( . )  t* depends on the df used, but the interval is about (0.51, 0.99).  This means  we are 95% confident that  the mean score for the intervention group is between 0.51 and 0.99 points higher than for the control  group.  (f) The results are not generalizable to other populations.    55.) n1 = 115, xbar1 = 18.0, s1 = 7.8  n2 = 220, xbar2 = 6.5, s2 = 3.4  (a) If this company’s working conditions are similar enough to others’, this may be a good enough  random sample.  (b) You may use df = 137.1 (software) or 114 (approximation) or 100 (closest value in table D). 
Docsity logo



Copyright © 2024 Ladybird Srl - Via Leonardo da Vinci 16, 10126, Torino, Italy - VAT 10816460017 - All rights reserved