/*! 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 19 Speed Skating Suits (Example 3) ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Speed Skating Suits (Example 3) Speed skating is a sport in which it is important to have a suit that minimizes wind drag as much as possible, as the difference between winning and losing a race can be as small as a thousandth of a second. In the 2014 Winter Olympics, U.S. speed skaters used a suit called the Mach 39 , and none medaled despite high expectation before the games. For the 2018 Winter Olympics, a new suit design called the H1 was developed. Suppose the designers wanted to test if skaters would be faster in the H1 or the Mach \(39 .\) They have 10 Olympic speed skaters and 10 recreational speed skaters on whom to test the suits. a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Describe a simple randomized design (not blocked) to test whether the H1 suit decreases race times. Explain in detail how you will assign skaters to treatment groups. c. Describe a blocked design using the types of skaters that could be used to test whether the \(\mathrm{Hl}\) suit decreases race times. What advantage does the blocked design have? d. Describe a design that uses the skaters as their own controls to reduce variation.

Short Answer

Expert verified
The treatment variable is the type of suit while the response variable is the skaters' speed. A simple randomized design would involve randomly assigning the 20 skaters to either H1 or Mach 39 and comparing the average speeds. A blocked design would prior group skaters based on their skill level (Olympics vs. Accommodation) and then assign the suits randomly within each group. Comparisons are made within each block to gain more precise results. A design that uses skaters as controls will involve each racer racing in both suits on different instances and recording the times. Each skater is thus their own control.

Step by step solution

01

Identify the treatment and response variable

The treatment variable is the type of speed skating suit (H1 vs. Mach 39). On the other hand, the response variable is the speed of the skaters, which could be measured using their race times.
02

Simple randomized design

For a simple randomized design, the 20 skaters can be randomly assigned to use either H1 or Mach 39, ensuring an equal chance of either suit being used. The race times of the skaters can then be recorded and a comparison between the two groups can be performed to determine if there's any significant difference in the times.
03

Blocked design

In the blocked design, the difference in the skill level of the speed skaters, defined as Olympic and recreational skaters, is taken into account. This design groups the skaters based on their skill level. Thus, 5 Olympic skaters would use the H1 suit and the other 5 would use Mach 39 and similarly for recreational skaters. Comparison of the race times is done within the blocks and the results are then combined. This design utilizes the information on the skaters' skill level and could increase the precision of the results.
04

Design using skaters as controls

Each skater can serve as their own control, by letting them race in both suits and recording the time in each. The sequence of which suit is worn first could be randomized to prevent any bias. Since each skater wears both suits, the effect of individual differences can be controlled for.

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.

Treatment and Response Variables
Understanding the concepts of treatment and response variables is fundamental in experimental design. Let's consider an example in speed skating: designers have developed two suit designs, the Mach 39 and the H1, intending to minimize wind resistance and improve speed. In this scenario, the treatment variable is the type of suit worn by the skaters, as it is the factor being manipulated to observe a potential effect.

The response variable, on the other hand, is the measurable effect of this treatment, which in our case is the skaters' race times. By comparing the response variable under the influence of different treatment variables, we aim to conclude whether one suit outperforms the other in reducing race times. Being able to clearly identify these variables is crucial for setting up a coherent and reliable study.
Simple Randomized Design
A simple randomized design is a basic yet powerful tool for experimental studies. It involves randomly assigning subjects to different treatment groups to ensure that each subject has an equal chance of receiving any particular treatment. The key aim here is to mitigate the effects of bias and unobserved variables.

For the speed skating suits, a simple randomized design would involve assigning the 20 skaters to either the Mach 39 or H1 suit randomly. This could be done, for example, by using a random number generator or drawing names from a hat. By randomizing skaters to each type of suit, any systematic differences between groups are minimized, making it more likely that differences in race times can be attributed to the suit design itself, rather than extraneous factors.
Blocked Design
Moving on to a more nuanced experimental strategy, a blocked design takes into account the natural groupings or 'blocks' within the experimental subjects that could affect the response variable. In our exercise, the skaters are divided into two blocks based on their skill level – Olympic skaters and recreational skaters.

In a blocked design, treatment is applied within these blocks. For instance, a random assignment of 5 Olympic skaters to the H1 suit and 5 to the Mach 39 suit occurs, and the same process is replicated for the recreational skaters. The main advantage of this approach is the increased accuracy of the results. By accounting for the skill level, the blocked design minimizes the variability within the groups, which might otherwise overshadow the effect of the treatment variable.
Control in Experimental Design
Incorporating control into experimental design is essential for isolating the treatment effect from the variability due to extraneous factors. One way to do this is by using the participants as their own controls, which is particularly useful when experimenting with effects that may be influenced by individual differences.

In the context of speed skating suits, having each skater race in both the H1 and the Mach 39 serves this purpose. This within-subject design ensures that variables like fitness level, experience, and natural speed are held constant, as each skater's performance in one type of suit can be directly compared to their performance in the other. To avoid biased results due to learning effects or fatigue, the order of the suit tests should be randomized. This method is highly effective in reducing intra-subject variation, allowing the precise measurement of the suit's effect on race times.

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

Tea and Divergent Creativity In a 2017 study published in the journal Food Quality and Preference, researchers investigated the effect of drinking tea on divergent creativity (Huang et al. 2017 ). Subjects were recruited from a campus Bulletin Board System and were paid a small stipend for their participation. Subjects were randomly assigned to be served either tea or water during the "greeting period" of the experiment. During the greeting period subjects filled out a background questionnaire so they were unaware that beverage was a key component in the study. Subjects were then told to build the most "attractive" building possible in a limited amount of time using a set of blocks. Independent observers then gave each building a creativity score. Read excerpts from the study results and answer the following questions. Results: A general linear model analysis showed that the creativity scores of the block buildings for the tea group (mean \(=6.54\), \(\mathrm{SD}=0.92\) ) were significantly higher than those for the water group (mean \(=6.03, \mathrm{SD}=0.94\) ) after controlling for gender and volume consumed \((p=0.023)\). a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Was this a controlled experiment or an observational study? Explain. c. Can you conclude from that drinking tea leads to improved creativity? Why or why not?

Civic Engagement and Health In a 2018 study reported in Child Development, Ballard et al. examined links between civic engagement (voting, volunteering, and activism) during late adolescence and early adulthood, and socioeconomic status and mental and physical health in adulthood. The researchers studied how civic engagement was associated with outcomes among 9471 adolescents and young adults. They found that all forms of civic engagement are positively associated with subsequent income and education level. Was this a controlled experiment or an observational study? Explain.

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting A study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine was conducted to compare outcomes for radial arterial grafts and saphenous-vein grafts in coronary artery bypass surgeries (Gaudino et al. 2018 ). Read this excerpt from the study abstract and answer the questions that follow. Methods: We performed a patient-level combined analysis of randomized, controlled trials to compare radial-artery grafts and saphenousvein grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting \((\mathrm{CABG}) .\) Six trials were identified. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization. Results: A total of 1036 patients were included in the analysis (534 patients with radial-artery grafts and 502 patients with saphenousvein grafts). After a mean \((\pm S D)\) follow-up time of \(60 \pm 30\) months, the incidence of adverse cardiac events was significantly lower in association with radial- artery grafts than with saphenous-vein grafts (95\% confidence interval [CI], \(0.49\) to \(0.90 ; \mathrm{P}=0.01\) ), As compared with the use of saphenous- vein grafts, the use of radial-artery grafts was associated with a nominally lower incidence of myocardial infarction (95\% CI, \(0.53\) to \(0.99 ; \mathrm{P}=0.04\) ) and a lower incidence of repeat revascularization \((95 \% \mathrm{Cl}, 0.40\) to \(0.63 ; \mathrm{P}<0.001)\) but not a lower incidence of death from any cause \((95 \% \mathrm{CI}, 0.59\) to \(1.41 ; \mathrm{P}=0.68)\). a. Which graft method had more positive outcomes? Explain. b. There was an outcome for which one method did not have significantly better outcomes than the other. What outcome was this and how does the p-value support this conclusion?

Intravenous Fluids Critically ill patients are often given intravenous fluids in hospital, either in the form of balanced crystalloids or saline solutions. In a 2018 study published in The New England Journal of Medicine, researchers investigated which of these approaches resulted in better clinical outcomes. Read this excerpt from the abstract that accompanies this study and answer the following questions (Semmler et al. 2018). Methods: In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial conducted in five intensive care units at an academic center, we assigned 15,802 adults to receive saline or balanced crystalloids. The primary outcome was a major adverse kidney event within 30 days \(-\) a composite of death from any cause, new renal-replacement therapy, or persistent renal dysfunction. Results: Among the 7942 patients in the balanced-crystalloids group, \(1139(14.3 \%)\) had a major adverse kidney event, as compared with 1211 of 7860 patients \((15.4 \%)\) in the saline group \((P=0.04)\). a. Identify the treatment variable. b. The response variable in this study is major adverse kidney event within 30 days. Was there a significant difference in occurrence of major adverse kidney events between the two groups? Explain. Assume a significance level of \(0.05\). c. Based on this study, do you think one type of intravenous fluid may be preferable over the other? Explain.

Professors A college administrator wants to determine whether the professors at the college are doing a good job. Each professor teaches multiple classes, and so for each professor, one of his or her classes is randomly chosen, and all the students are surveyed to find out their opinion of the teacher. What kind of sampling is this?

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.