/*! 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 67 Exercise 10.40 examined an adver... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Exercise 10.40 examined an advertisement for Albertsons, a supermarket chain in the western United States. The advertiser claims that Albertsons has consistently had lower prices than four other full-service supermarkets. As part of a survey conducted by an "independent market basket price-checking company," the average weekly total based on the prices of approximately 95 items is given for five different supermarket chains recorded during 4 consecutive weeks. $$ \begin{array}{llrlll} & \text { Albertsons } & \text { Ralphs } & \text { Vons } & \text { Alpha Beta } & \text { Lucky } \\ \hline \text { Week 1 } & \$ 254.26 & \$ 256.03 & \$ 267.92 & \$ 260.71 & \$ 258.84 \\ \text { Week 2 } & 240.62 & 255.65 & 251.55 & 251.80 & 242.14 \\ \text { Week 3 } & 231.90 & 255.12 & 245.89 & 246.77 & 246.80 \\ \text { Week 4 } & 234.13 & 261.18 & 254.12 & 249.45 & 248.99 \end{array} $$ a. What type of design has been used in this experiment? b. Conduct an analysis of variance for the data. c. Is there sufficient evidence to indicate that there is a difference in the average weekly totals for the five supermarkets? Use \(\alpha=.05\) d. Use Tukey's method for paired comparisons to determine which of the means are significantly different from each other. Use \(\alpha=.05 .\)

Short Answer

Expert verified
Answer: To determine if there is a significant difference among the supermarkets, perform an analysis of variance (ANOVA) and compare the F-statistic for supermarkets with the critical F-value at a significance level of 0.05. If the F-statistic is greater than the critical F-value, there is a significant difference. Additionally, utilize Tukey's method for paired comparisons to identify which means are significantly different from each other.

Step by step solution

01

a. Identify the design type

This experiment follows a two-factor factorial design, with factors being the supermarkets and the weeks, both having fixed levels.
02

b. Conduct an ANOVA

First, let's calculate the overall mean, the mean price of each supermarket, and the mean price of each week, as well as the sums of squares for the supermarkets (SS_supermarkets), weeks (SS_weeks), and the error (SS_error). $$ \bar{X} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^5 \sum_{j=1}^4 X_{ij}}{20} $$ $$ \bar{X_i} = \frac{\sum_{j=1}^4 X_{ij}}{4}, \bar{X_j} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^5 X_{ij}}{5} $$ $$ SS_{supermarkets} = 4 \sum_{i=1}^5 (\bar{X_i} - \bar{X})^2 $$ $$ SS_{weeks} = 5 \sum_{j=1}^4 (\bar{X_j} - \bar{X})^2 $$ $$ SS_{error} = \sum_{i=1}^5 \sum_{j=1}^4 (X_{ij} - \bar{X_i} - \bar{X_j} + \bar{X})^2 $$ Calculate the mean squares by dividing the sums of squares by their respective degrees of freedom: $$ MS_{supermarkets} = \frac{SS_{supermarkets}}{4-1}, MS_{weeks} = \frac{SS_{weeks}}{4-1}, MS_{error} = \frac{SS_{error}}{(4-1)(5-1)} $$ Now, we can calculate the F-statistics for the supermarkets and weeks: $$ F_{supermarkets} = \frac{MS_{supermarkets}}{MS_{error}}, F_{weeks} = \frac{MS_{weeks}}{MS_{error}} $$
03

c. Test for sufficient evidence

To test for sufficient evidence of a difference in average weekly totals among the supermarkets, compare the calculated F-statistic for supermarkets (\(F_{supermarkets}\)) with the critical F-value, \(F_{3,12;0.05}\), at a significance level of 0.05. If \(F_{supermarkets} > F_{3,12;0.05}\), we can conclude there is sufficient evidence to indicate a difference in average weekly totals for the five supermarkets.
04

d. Tukey's method for paired comparisons

To use Tukey's method, first, we calculate the differences in the mean prices between each pair of supermarkets: $$ \Delta_{ij} = \bar{X}_i - \bar{X}_j $$ Next, we compare these differences with the Tukey's critical value, \(q_{3,12;\alpha}\), multiplied by the square root of the mean square error (MSE) divided by the number of observations per cell (in this case, weeks). If the absolute difference in means, \(|\Delta_{ij}|\), is greater than the critical value times the standard error, we can conclude that there is a significant difference between the means of supermarkets i and j: $$ |\Delta_{ij}| > q_{3,12;0.05} \times \sqrt{\frac{MS_{error}}{4}} $$

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.

Two-Factor Factorial Design
In the context of statistical experiments, a two-factor factorial design is a type of experimental structure that allows researchers to observe the effects of two different factors simultaneously. Here, the two factors are the supermarket chains and the weeks. This design is particularly useful when wanting to understand how multiple factors interact with each other.
  • The benefits of a two-factor factorial design include efficiency and a better understanding of interaction effects.
  • Each factor is considered to have fixed levels, meaning the levels are pre-set and not randomly selected.
  • This design provides more information than conducting separate one-factor experiments, as it helps in exploring interaction between the factors.
These interactions can reveal complexities in data that single-factor designs may overlook, offering a comprehensive view of the factors' combined effects on the outcome. It is especially important when the factors are likely to influence each other, as in the case of supermarket pricing across different weeks.
Tukey's Method
Tukey's method, or Tukey's Honest Significant Difference test, is a statistical tool used for making pairwise comparisons while controlling for family-wise error rates. It is particularly useful following an ANOVA when you've determined there is a significant difference in averages among groups.
  • Tukey's method is essential for identifying where differences lie between group means.
  • The process involves calculating the difference between all pairs of group means.
  • It compares each of these differences against a critical value that accounts for variations across the dataset.
If the absolute mean difference between any two groups exceeds the critical value, it indicates a significant difference. This method is robust across various scenarios, ensuring you have clear results on which groups differ significantly. This is valuable in contexts such as evaluating supermarket price differences, where identifying specific price disparities between chains is crucial.
F-Statistics
The F-statistic is a ratio used in ANOVA to determine if there are any statistically significant differences between the means of several groups. The F-statistic serves as a test for comparing variance among group means relative to variance within the groups.
  • Calculation involves dividing the mean square for the factor by the mean square for error.
  • A higher F-statistic suggests a greater degree of variance among group means compared to within-group variance.
  • If the F-statistic is greater than the critical F-value from the F-distribution table, you can conclude there is a significant difference among the means.
This comparison allows researchers to determine whether the observed differences are due to actual group effects or are simply random variations. In the case of supermarket prices over different weeks, a significant F-statistic would indicate that the differences in weekly prices are not due to random chance, affirming the effect of the supermarkets on the pricing structure.

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

Water samples were taken at four different locations in a river to determine whether the quantity of dissolved oxygen, a measure of water pollution, varied from one location to another. Locations 1 and 2 were selected above an industrial plant, one near the shore and the other in midstream; location 3 was adjacent to the industrial water discharge for the plant; and location 4 was slightly downriver in midstream. Five water specimens were randomly selected at each location, but one specimen, corresponding to location \(4,\) was lost in the laboratory. The data and a MINITAB analysis of variance computer printout are provided here (the greater the pollution, the lower the dissolved oxygen readings). $$ \begin{array}{llllll} \text { Location } && {\text { Mean Dissolved }} {\text { Oxygen Content }} \\\ \hline 1 &&& 5.9 & 6.1 & 6.3 & 6.1 & 6.0 \\ 2 &&& 6.3 & 6.6 & 6.4 & 6.4 & 6.5 \\ 3 &&& 4.8 & 4.3 & 5.0 & 4.7 & 5.1 \\ 4 &&& 6.0 & 6.2 & 6.1 & 5.8 & \end{array} $$ a. Do the data provide sufficient evidence to indicate a difference in the mean dissolved oxygen contents for the four locations? b. Compare the mean dissolved oxygen content in midstream above the plant with the mean content adjacent to the plant (location 2 versus location 3 ). Use a \(95 \%\) confidence interval.

A study was conducted to compare automobile gasoline mileage for three formulations of gasoline. A was a non-leaded 87 octane formulation, \(\mathrm{B}\) was a non-leaded 91 octane formulation, and \(\mathrm{C}\) was a non-leaded 87 octane formulation with \(15 \%\) ethanol. Four automobiles, all of the same make and model, were used in the experiment, and each formulation was tested in each automobile. Using each formulation in the same automobile has the effect of eliminating (blocking out) automobile-toautomobile variability. The data (in miles per gallon) follow. $$ \begin{array}{lcccc} && {\text { Automobile }} \\ \hline \text { Formulation } & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\ \hline \mathrm{A} & 25.7 & 27.0 & 27.3 & 26.1 \\ \mathrm{~B} & 27.2 & 28.1 & 27.9 & 27.7 \\ \mathrm{C} & 26.1 & 27.5 & 26.8 & 27.8 \end{array} $$ a. Do the data provide sufficient evidence to indicate a difference in mean mileage per gallon for the three gasoline formulations? b. Is there evidence of a difference in mean mileage for the four automobiles? c. Suppose that prior to looking at the data, you had decided to compare the mean mileage per gallon for formulations A and B. Find a \(90 \%\) confidence interval for this difference. d. Use an appropriate method to identify the pairwise differences, if any, in the average mileages for the three formulations.

Suppose you were to conduct a two-factor factorial experiment, factor \(\mathrm{A}\) at four levels and factor \(\mathrm{B}\) at two levels, with \(r\) replications per treatment. a. How many treatments are involved in the experiment? b. How many observations are involved? c. List the sources of variation and their respective degrees of freedom.

An article in Archaeometry involved an analysis of 26 samples of Romano- British pottery, found at four different kiln sites in the United Kingdom. \(^{9}\) Since one site only yielded two samples, consider the samples found at the other three sites. The samples were analyzed to determine their chemical composition and the percentage of iron oxide is shown below. a. What type of experimental design is this? b. Use an analysis of variance to determine if there is a difference in the average percentage of iron oxide at the three sites. Use \(\alpha=.01\). c. If you have access to a computer program, generate the diagnostic plots for this experiment. Does it appear that any of the analysis of variance assumptions have been violated? Explain.

An experiment was conducted to compare the effects of four different chemicals, \(\mathrm{A}, \mathrm{B}, \mathrm{C},\) and \(\mathrm{D},\) in producing water resistance in textiles. A strip of material, randomly selected from a bolt, was cut into four pieces, and the four pieces were randomly assigned to receive one of the four chemicals, \(\mathrm{A}, \mathrm{B}, \mathrm{C},\) or \(\mathrm{D} .\) This process was replicated three times, thus producing a randomized block design. The design, with moistureresistance measurements, is as shown in the figure (low readings indicate low moisture penetration). Analyze the experiment using a method appropriate for this randomized block design. Identify the blocks and treatments, and investigate any possible differences in treatment means. If any differences exist, use an appropriate method to specifically identify where the differences lie. What are the practical implications for the chemical producers? Has blocking been effective in this experiment? Present your results in the form of a report. $$$ \begin{aligned} &\text { Blocks (bolt samples) }\\\ &\begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline 1 & 2 & 3 \\ \hline \mathrm{C} & \mathrm{D} & \mathrm{B} \\ 9.9 & 13.4 & 12.7 \\ \mathrm{A} & \mathrm{B} & \mathrm{D} \\ 10.1 & 12.9 & 12.9 \\ \mathrm{B} & \mathrm{A} & \mathrm{C} \\ 11.4 & 12.2 & 11.4 \\ \mathrm{D}_{2} & \mathrm{C} & \mathrm{A} \\ 12.1 & 12.3 & 11.9 \end{array} \end{aligned} $$

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.