Length is not very important in evaluating the quality of corks because it has
little to do with the effectiveness of a cork in preserving wine. Winemakers
have several lengths to choose from and order the length of cork they prefer
(long corks tend to make a louder pop when the bottle is uncorked). Length is
monitored very closely, though, because it is a specified quality of the cork.
The lengths of no. 9 natural corks \((24 \mathrm{mm}\) diameter by \(45
\mathrm{mm}\) length) have a normal distribution. Twelve randomly selected
corks were measured to the nearest hundredth of a millimeter.
$$\begin{array}{llllll}\hline 44.95 & 44.95 & 44.80 & 44.93 & 45.22 & 44.82
\\\45.12 & 44.62 & 45.17 & 44.60 &44.60 & 44.75 \\\\\hline\end{array}$$
a. Does the preceding sample give sufficient reason to show that the mean
length is different from \(45.0 \mathrm{mm}\) at the 0.02 level of significance?
A different random sample of 18 corks is taken from the same batch.
$$\begin{array}{lllllllll}\hline 45.17 & 45.02 & 45.30 & 45.14 & 45.35 & 45.50
& 45.26 & 44.88 & 44.71 \\\44.07 & 45.10 & 45.01 & 44.83 & 45.13 & 44.69 &
44.89 & 45.15 & 45.13 \\\\\hline\end{array}$$
b. Does the preceding sample give sufficient reason to show that the mean
length is different from \(45.0 \mathrm{mm}\) at the 0.02 level of significance?
c. What effect did the two different sample means have on the calculated test
statistic in parts a and b? Explain.
d. What effect did the two different sample sizes have on the calculated test
statistic in parts a and b? Explain.
e. What effect did the two different sample standard deviations have on the
calculated test statistic in parts a and b? Explain.