/*! 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 2 Suppose the consequences of maki... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Suppose the consequences of making a Type I error are severe. Would you choose the level of significance, \(\alpha,\) to equal \(0.01,0.05,\) or \(0.10 ?\) Why?

Short Answer

Expert verified
\(\backslashalpha = 0.01\) because it minimizes the risk of a Type I error.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding Type I Error

A Type I error occurs when a true null hypothesis is rejected. The level of significance \(\backslashalpha\) represents the probability of making a Type I error. Therefore, reducing \(\backslashalpha\) reduces the risk of rejecting a true null hypothesis.
02

Analyzing the Choices of \(\backslashalpha\)

The given options for \(\backslashalpha\) are 0.01, 0.05, and 0.10. Lower values of \(\backslashalpha\) indicate a stricter criterion for rejecting the null hypothesis, thereby decreasing the likelihood of a Type I error.
03

Choosing the Most Appropriate \(\backslashalpha\)

Since the consequences of making a Type I error are severe in this scenario, selecting the lowest level of significance, \(\backslashalpha = 0.01\), minimizes the probability of making this error. Hence, \(\backslashalpha = 0.01\) is the most appropriate choice.

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.

Type I error
A Type I error happens when we reject the null hypothesis even though it is actually true. Imagine you wrongly believe a medicine works when it doesn't. This error can have serious outcomes, especially in critical fields like medicine or quality control.

To put it simply, whenever you see 'Type I error,' think about making an incorrect positive claim. For example, claiming there is an effect (like a medicine works) when in reality, there isn't any. This error is crucial because it can mislead decisions and policies based on incorrect conclusions.

The goal of many statistical tests is to limit the chances of making a Type I error. Understanding this, you can see why selecting a lower alpha level is important when Type I errors carry severe consequences.
alpha level
The alpha level, \( \alpha\), is a threshold that determines when you reject the null hypothesis. It is also known as the significance level. This value controls how often you are willing to make a Type I error. Common choices for \alpha\ are 0.01, 0.05, and 0.10.

Here's how to understand these values better:
  • α = 0.10 means a 10% chance of making a Type I error
  • α = 0.05 means a 5% chance
  • α = 0.01 means a 1% chance
When consequences of a Type I error are severe, you want to minimize this risk, which is why choosing the smallest \alpha\ is the best strategy.

For example, if you're testing a new drug and a false positive could harm patients, you would choose α = 0.01 to ensure there's only a 1% chance of incorrectly saying the drug works.
null hypothesis
The null hypothesis, often denoted as \( H_0 \), is a statement that there is no effect or no difference. It serves as the starting point for statistical testing. You assume this hypothesis is true until you have enough evidence to reject it.

For example, if you are testing whether a new teaching method is effective, the null hypothesis might state that the new method has no effect on students' performance. Rejecting the \( H_0 \) would mean you have found sufficient evidence to say the new method does have an effect.

When making a decision, you compare the calculated p-value of your test to the alpha level:
  • If the p-value is less than \alpha\, you reject the null hypothesis
  • If the p-value is greater, you fail to reject the null hypothesis
Always remember, failing to reject \( H_0 \) does not mean it’s true; it only means there isn’t enough evidence to say it’s false.

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

The manufacturer of Prolong Engine Treatment claims that if you add one 12 -ounce bottle of its \(\$ 20\) product, your engine will be protected from excessive wear. An infomercial claims that a woman drove 4 hours without oil, thanks to Prolong. Consumer Reports magazine tested engines in which they added Prolong to the motor oil, ran the engines, drained the oil, and then determined the time until the engines seized. (a) Determine the null and alternative hypotheses Consumer Reports will test. (b) Both engines took exactly 13 minutes to seize. What conclusion might Consumer Reports draw based on this evidence?

Confidence in Schools In \(1995,40 \%\) of adults aged 18 years or older reported that they had "a great deal" of confidence in the public schools. On June \(1,2005,\) the Gallup Organization released results of a poll in which 372 of 1004 adults aged 18 years or older stated that they had "a great deal" of confidence in the public schools. Does the evidence suggest at the \(\alpha=0.05\) level of significance that the proportion of adults aged 18 years or older having "a great deal" of confidence in the public schools is significantly lower in 2005 than the 1995 proportion?

(a) determine the null and alternative hypotheses, (b) explain what it would mean to make a Type I error, and (c) explain what it would mean to make a Type II error. According to Giving and Volunteering in the United States, 2001 Edition, the mean charitable contribution per household in the United States in 2000 was \(\$ 1623 .\) A researcher believes that the level of giving has changed since then.

Conduct the appropriate test. A simple random sample of size \(n=15\) is drawn from a population that is normally distributed. The sample mean is found to be \(23.8,\) and the sample standard deviation is found to be \(6.3 .\) Test whether the population mean is different from 25 at the \(\alpha=0.01\) level of significance.

Pathological Gamblers Pathological gambling is an impulse-control disorder. The American Psychiatric Association lists 10 characteristics that indicate the disorder in its DSM-IV manual. The National Gambling Impact Study Commission randomly selected 2417 adults and found that 35 were pathological gamblers. Is there evidence to conclude that more than \(1 \%\) of the adult population are pathological gamblers at the \(\alpha=0.05\) level of significance?

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.