/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 24 In one segment of the TV series ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

In one segment of the TV series MythBusters, an experiment was conducted to test the common belief that people are more likely to yawn when they see others yawning. In one group, 34 subjects were exposed to yawning, and 10 of them yawned. In another group, 16 subjects were not exposed to yawning, and 4 of them yawned. We want to test the belief that people are more likely to yawn when they are exposed to yawning. a. Why can't we test the claim using the methods of this section? b. If we ignore the requirements and use the methods of this section, what is the \(P\) -value? How does it compare to the \(P\) -value of 0.5128 that would be obtained by using Fisher's exact test? c. Comment on the conclusion of the Mythbusters segment that yawning is contagious.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Standard methods can't be used due to small sample sizes and assumptions not met. P-value from Fisher's exact test is 0.5128, suggesting weak evidence for yawning being contagious.

Step by step solution

01

- Identify the Problem

We need to evaluate the claim that people are more likely to yawn when they see others yawning. This involves statistical analysis of two groups: one exposed to yawning and one not exposed.
02

- Assess Why Standard Methods Cannot be Used

Standard methods often require larger sample sizes or normally distributed data, which may not be applicable given the small sample sizes here (34 and 16). Additionally, these methods assume the samples are collected independently and randomly.
03

- Calculate the Test Statistic and P-value

Using the pooled proportion test for small sample sizes, calculate the proportion of subjects who yawned in each group. Group 1 (exposed): o1 (number who yawned) = 10 t1 (total subjects) = 34 p1 = 10/34 Group 2 (not exposed): o2 (number who yawned) = 4 t2 (total subjects) = 16 p2 = 4/16 Pooled proportion: p = (o1 + o2) / (t1 + t2) p = (10 + 4) / (34 + 16) = 14/50 = 0.28 z = (p1 - p2) / sqrt(p * (1 - p) * (1/t1 + 1/t2)) z = (10/34 - 4/16) / sqrt(0.28 * (1 - 0.28) * (1/34 + 1/16)) z ≈ 0.69 Using a z-table, find the P-value associated with z = 0.69.
04

- Compare P-values

The calculated P-value must then be compared to the P-value obtained using Fisher's exact test: 0.5128.
05

- Comment on Conclusion

Evaluate how the P-values (calculated and Fisher's exact test) support or refute the claim. Higher P-values (close to 1) suggest weak evidence against the null hypothesis, implying yawning may not be contagious based on this sample.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Statistical Hypothesis Testing
Statistical hypothesis testing is a method used to make decisions about the properties of a population based on sample data. When we conduct a hypothesis test, we typically start with a null hypothesis, which is a statement of no effect or no difference. In our case, the null hypothesis (H0) could be 'Yawning is not affected by exposure to yawning,' meaning the proportion of people who yawn when exposed to yawning is the same as when not exposed.

The alternative hypothesis (H1) would be 'Yawning is affected by exposure to yawning,' meaning the proportion of people who yawn when exposed to yawning is different from when they are not exposed. The goal is to gather enough evidence from the sample data to either reject H0 in favor of H1 or fail to reject H0, keeping H0 as a plausible conclusion based on the available data.

Common steps in hypothesis testing include:
  • Formulating H0 and H1
  • Collecting sample data
  • Calculating a test statistic based on the sample
  • Determining a P-value to evaluate the test statistic
  • Making a conclusion based on the P-value and a pre-determined significance level (like 0.05)

By following these steps, researchers can make objective decisions supported by data rather than intuition or speculation.
P-value Calculation
The P-value is a probability that measures the evidence against the null hypothesis. A smaller P-value indicates stronger evidence against H0, suggesting that the observed data is unlikely under H0.

To calculate the P-value, we first need a test statistic that summarizes the sample data. For example, in the MythBusters' yawning experiment, we used a z-test because we are comparing proportions between two groups. The test statistic (z) is calculated based on the sample proportions and pooled proportion.

For our example:
  • Proportion for exposure group (p1) = 10/34
  • Proportion for non-exposure group (p2) = 4/16
  • Pooled proportion (p) = (10 + 4) / (34 + 16) = 0.28
  • Test statistic (z) = \( \frac{p1 - p2}{\text{sqrt}(p \times (1 - p) \times (1/t1 + 1/t2))} \) = 0.69

After calculating the z-value, we refer to standard normal distribution tables to find the P-value. The resulting P-value lets us determine if we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis. In this case, a high P-value suggests we do not have strong evidence to claim that yawning is contagious.
Fisher's Exact Test
Fisher's Exact Test is a statistical test used to determine if there are nonrandom associations between two categorical variables. It's particularly useful when sample sizes are small, as it doesn't rely on the assumptions of larger samples.

In the context of the MythBusters' experiment, we are comparing the 'yawners' and 'non-yawners' in both the exposed and non-exposed groups. Fisher's Exact Test calculates the exact probability of obtaining the observed results, or more extreme, under the null hypothesis.

Steps include:
  • Arranging data in a 2x2 contingency table:
    • Exposed and yawned: 10
    • Exposed and did not yawn: 24
    • Not exposed and yawned: 4
    • Not exposed and did not yawn: 12
  • Calculating the probability of each possible outcome
  • Summing these probabilities to find the P-value

In our example, Fisher's Exact Test gave a P-value of 0.5128, which is quite high. This indicates there is no significant association between yawning and exposure to yawning based on the sample data. The conclusion supports the null hypothesis, suggesting yawning might not be as contagious as traditionally believed.
Proportion Testing
Proportion testing involves comparing proportions to understand if differences observed between groups are statistically significant. In the MythBusters' experiment, we compare the yawning proportions of two groups: those exposed to yawning and those not exposed.

Here’s a quick guide to the steps involved in proportion testing:
  • Determine sample proportions (p1 and p2)
  • Calculate the pooled proportion (p)
  • Compute the standard error of the difference between proportions
  • Find the test statistic (z-value)
  • Look up the P-value for the test statistic

In the MythBusters' example:
  • p1 = 10/34 for the exposed group
  • p2 = 4/16 for the non-exposed group
  • p = 0.28 (pooled)
  • Standard error = \(\text{sqrt}(p \times (1 - p) \times (1/t1 + 1/t2))\)
  • z = 0.69
  • P-value = corresponds to z = 0.69

A high P-value indicates no significant difference in proportions. Thus, based on the data, yawning exposure does not significantly increase the probability of yawning in others.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Researchers conducted a study to determine whether magnets are effective in treating back pain, with results given below (based on data from "Bipolar Permanent Magnets for the Treatment of Chronic Lower Back Pain: A Pilot Study." by Collacott, Zimmerman, White, and Rindone, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 283, No. 10. The values represent measurements of pain using the visual analog scale. Use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that those given a sham treatment (similar to a placebo) have pain reductions that vary more than the pain reductions for those treated with magnets. Reduction in Pain Level After Sham Treatment: \(\quad n=20, \bar{x}=0.44, s=1.4\) Reduction in Pain Level After Magnet Treatment: \(\quad n=20, \bar{x}=0.49, s=0.96\)

Assume that the two samples are independent simple random samples selected from normally distributed populations, and do not assume that the population standard deviations are equal. (Note: Answers in Appendix D include technology answers based on Formula 9 - 1 along with "Table" answers based on Table \(A\) - 3 with df equal to the smaller of \(\boldsymbol{n}_{I}-\boldsymbol{I}\) and \(\boldsymbol{n}_{2}-\boldsymbol{I} .\) ) Are Quarters Now Lighter? Weights of quarters are carefully considered in the design of the vending machines that we have all come to know and love. Data Set 29 "Coin Weights" in Appendix B includes weights of a sample of pre-1964 quarters \((n=40, \bar{x}=6.19267 \mathrm{g}\) \(s=0.08700 \mathrm{g}\) ) and weights of a sample of post- 1964 quarters \((n=40, \bar{x}=5.63930 \mathrm{g}\) \(s=0.06194 \mathrm{g}\) a. Use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that pre-1964 quarters have a mean weight that is greater than the mean weight of post-1964 quarters. b. Construct a confidence interval appropriate for the hypothesis test in part (a). c. Do post-1964 quarters appear to weigh less than before \(1964 ?\) If so, why aren't vending machines affected very much by the difference?

The sample size needed to estimate the difference between two population proportions to within a margin of error \(E\) with a confidence level of \(1-\alpha\) can be found by using the following expression: $$ E=z_{\alpha / 2} \sqrt{\frac{p_{1} q_{1}}{n_{1}}+\frac{p_{2} q_{2}}{n_{2}}} $$ Replace \(n_{1}\) and \(n_{2}\) by \(n\) in the preceding formula (assuming that both samples have the same size) and replace each of \(p_{1}, q_{1}, p_{2},\) and \(q_{2}\) by 0.5 (because their values are not known). Solving for \(n\) results in this expression: $$n=\frac{z_{\alpha / 2}^{2}}{2 E^{2}}$$ Use this expression to find the size of each sample if you want to estimate the difference between the proportions of men and women who own smartphones. Assume that you want \(95 \%\) confidence that your error is no more than 0.03

Assume that the two samples are independent simple random samples selected from normally distributed populations, and do not assume that the population standard deviations are equal. (Note: Answers in Appendix D include technology answers based on Formula 9 - 1 along with "Table" answers based on Table \(A\) - 3 with df equal to the smaller of \(\boldsymbol{n}_{I}-\boldsymbol{I}\) and \(\boldsymbol{n}_{2}-\boldsymbol{I} .\) ) Blanking Out on Tests Many students have had the unpleasant experience of panicking on a test because the first question was exceptionally difficult. The arrangement of test items was studied for its effect on anxiety. The following scores are measures of "debilitating test anxiety." which most of us call panic or blanking out (based on data from "Item Arrangement, Cognitive Entry Characteristics, Sex and Test Anxiety as Predictors of Achievement in Examination Performance," by Klimko, Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 52, No. 4.) Is there sufficient evidence to support the claim that the two populations of scores have different means? Is there sufficient evidence to support the claim that the arrangement of the test items has an effect on the score? Is the conclusion affected by whether the significance level is 0.05 or 0.01? $$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline {}{} {\text { Questions Arranged from Easy to Difficult }} \\ \hline 24.64 & 39.29 & 16.32 & 32.83 & 28.02 \\ \hline 33.31 & 20.60 & 21.13 & 26.69 & 28.90 \\ \hline 26.43 & 24.23 & 7.10 & 32.86 & 21.06 \\ \hline 28.89 & 28.71 & 31.73 & 30.02 & 21.96 \\ \hline 25.49 & 38.81 & 27.85 & 30.29 & 30.72 \\ \hline\end{array}$$ $$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|} \hline {}{} {\text { Questions Arranged from Difficult to Easy }} \\ \hline 33.62 & 34.02 & 26.63 & 30.26 \\ \hline 35.91 & 26.68 & 29.49 & 35.32 \\ \hline 27.24 & 32.34 & 29.34 & 33.53 \\ \hline 27.62 & 42.91 & 30.20 & 32.54 \\ \hline\end{array}$$

Assume that the two samples are independent simple random samples selected from normally distributed populations, and do not assume that the population standard deviations are equal. (Note: Answers in Appendix D include technology answers based on Formula 9 - 1 along with "Table" answers based on Table \(A\) - 3 with df equal to the smaller of \(\boldsymbol{n}_{I}-\boldsymbol{I}\) and \(\boldsymbol{n}_{2}-\boldsymbol{I} .\) ) Color and Cognition Researchers from the University of British Columbia conducted a study to investigate the effects of color on cognitive tasks. Words were displayed on a computer screen with background colors of red and blue. Results from scores on a test of word recall are given below. Higher scores correspond to greater word recall. a. Use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that the samples are from populations with the same mean. b. Construct a confidence interval appropriate for the hypothesis test in part (a). What is it about the confidence interval that causes us to reach the same conclusion from part (a)? c. Does the background color appear to have an effect on word recall scores? If so, which color appears to be associated with higher word memory recall scores? $$\begin{array}{l|l} \hline \text { Red Background } & n=35, \mathrm{x}=15.89, \mathrm{s}=5.90 \\ \hline \text { Blue Background } & n=36, \mathrm{x}=12.31, \mathrm{s}=5.48 \\ \hline \end{array}$$

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.