/*! 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} Q16 E To decide whether two different ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

To decide whether two different types of steel have the same true average fracture toughness values, n specimens of each type are tested, yielding the following results:

\(\begin{array}{l}\underline {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}{ Type }&{ Sample Average }&{ Sample SD }\\1&{60.1}&{1.0}\\2&{59.9}&{1.0}\\{}&{}&{}\end{array}} \\\end{array}\)

Calculate the P-value for the appropriate two-sample \(z\) test, assuming that the data was based on \(n = 100\). Then repeat the calculation for \(n = 400\). Is the small P-value for \(n = 400\) indicative of a difference that has practical significance? Would you have been satisfied with just a report of the P-value? Comment briefly.a

Short Answer

Expert verified

the solution is

The slight difference in the genuine average has been amplified statistically due to the huge sample size \(n = 400\). In practice, the little difference in sample average values would lead one to believe that there is no difference between them. The P- value would be insufficient - it would be unsatisfactory

Step by step solution

01

calculate p value

when the null hypothesis is

\({H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = {\Delta _0}\)

the test statistic value

\(z = \frac{{(\bar x - \bar y) - {\Delta _0}}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{s_1^2}}{m} + \frac{{s_2^2}}{n}} }}\)

The \(P\) value is derived for the acceptable alternative hypothesis by calculating the adequate area under the standard normal curve. When both \(m > 40 and n > 40\), this test can be employed.

The sample size is the same and exceeds \(40(100,400 > 40)\). When \(n = 100\), the value of the test statistic is.

\(z = \frac{{(\bar x - \bar y) - {\Delta _0}}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{s_1^2}}{m} + \frac{{s_2^2}}{n}} }} = \frac{{60.1 - 59.9}}{{\sqrt {\frac{1}{{100}} + \frac{1}{{100}}} }} = 1.41.\)

02

calculated phi

the alternative hypothesis is two sided \(\left( {{H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} \ne 0} \right)\) the p value

\(\begin{array}{l}2.P(Z > 1.41) = 2 \times (1 - P(Z \le 1.41) = 2.(1 - \Phi (1.41))\\ = 0.1586\end{array}\)

where \(\Phi (1.41)\) was calculated using the appendix table.

When \(n = 400\)

\(z = \frac{{(\bar x - \bar y) - {\Delta _0}}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{s_1^2}}{m} + \frac{{s_2^2}}{n}} }} = \frac{{60.1 - 59.9}}{{\sqrt {\frac{1}{{400}} + \frac{1}{{400}}} }} = 2.83.\)

The alternative hypothesis is two sided \(\left( {{H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} \ne 0} \right)\), the \(P\) value is

\(\begin{array}{l}2.P(Z > 2.83) = 2 \times (1 - P(Z \le 2.83) = 2 \times (1 - \Phi (2.83))\\ = 0.0046\end{array}\)

where \(\Phi (2.83)\) was calculated using the appendix table.

The slight difference in the genuine average has been amplified statistically due to the huge sample size \(n = 400\). In practice, the little difference in sample average values would lead one to believe that there is no difference between them. The P- value would be insufficient - it would be unsatisfactory.

03

conclusion

The slight difference in the genuine average has been amplified statistically due to the huge sample size\(n = 400\). In practice, the little difference in sample average values would lead one to believe that there is no difference between them. The P- value would be insufficient - it would be unsatisfactory

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!

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

Teen Court is a juvenile diversion program designed to circumvent the formal processing of first-time juvenile offenders within the juvenile justice system. The article "An Experimental Evaluation of Teen Courts" (J. of Experimental Criminology, 2008: 137-163) reported on a study in which offenders were randomly assigned either to Teen Court or to the traditional Department of Juvenile Services method of processing. Of the \(56TC\) individuals, 18 subsequently recidivated (look it up!) during the 18 -month follow-up period, whereas 12 of the 51 DJS individuals did so. Does the data suggest that the true proportion of TC individuals who recidivate during the specified follow-up period differs from the proportion of DJS individuals who do so? State and test the relevant hypotheses using a significance level of 0.10.

Antipsychotic drugs are widely prescribed for conditions such as schizophrenia and bipolar disease. The article "Cardiometabolic Risk of SecondGeneration Antipsychotic Medications During First-Time Use in Children and Adolescents"\((J\). of the Amer. Med. Assoc., 2009) reported on body composition and metabolic changes for individuals who had taken various antipsychotic drugs for short periods of time.

a. The sample of 41 individuals who had taken aripiprazole had a mean change in total cholesterol (mg/dL) of\(3.75\), and the estimated standard error\({s_D}/\sqrt n \)was\(3.878\). Calculate a confidence interval with confidence level approximately\(95\% \)for the true average increase in total cholesterol under these circumstances (the cited article included this CI).

b. The article also reported that for a sample of 36 individuals who had taken quetiapine, the sample mean cholesterol level change and estimated standard error were\(9.05\)and\(4.256\), respectively. Making any necessary assumptions about the distribution of change in cholesterol level, does the choice of significance level impact your conclusion as to whether true average cholesterol level increases? Explain. (Note: The article included a\(P\)-value.)

c. For the sample of 45 individuals who had taken olanzapine, the article reported\(99\% CI\)as a\(95\% \)CI for true average weight gain\((kg)\). What is a $\(99\% CI\)?

Suppose \({\mu _1}\) and \({\mu _2}\) are true mean stopping distances at \(50mph\) for cars of a certain type equipped with two different types of braking systems. Use the two-sample t test at significance level

t test at significance level \(.01\) to test \({H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 10\) versus \({H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} < - 10\) for the following data: \(m = 6,\;\;\;\bar x = 115.7,{s_1} = 5.03,n = 6,\bar y = 129.3,\;\)and \({s_2} = 5.38.\)

It is well known that a placebo, a fake medication or treatment, can sometimes have a positive effect just because patients often expect the medication or treatment to be helpful. The article "Beware the Nocebo Effect" (New York Times, Aug. 12, 2012) gave examples of a less familiar phenomenon, the tendency for patients informed of possible side effects to actually experience those side effects. The article cited a study reported in The Journal of Sexual Medicine in which a group of patients diagnosed with benign prostatic hyperplasia was randomly divided into two subgroups. One subgroup of size 55 received a compound of proven efficacy along with counseling that a potential side effect of the treatment was erectile dysfunction. The other subgroup of size 52 was given the same treatment without counseling. The percentage of the no-counseling subgroup that reported one or more sexual side effects was 15.3 %, whereas 43.6 % of the counseling subgroup reported at least one sexual side effect. State and test the appropriate hypotheses at significance level .05 to decide whether the nocebo effect is operating here. (Note: The estimated expected number of "successes" in the no-counseling sample is a bit shy of 10, but not by enough to be of great concern (some sources use a less conservative cutoff of 5 rather than 10).)

The derailment of a freight train due to the catastrophic failure of a traction motor armature bearing provided the impetus for a study reported in the article "Locomotive Traction Motor Armature Bearing Life Study" (Lubrication Engr., Aug. 1997: 12-19). A sample of high-mileage traction motors was selected, and the amount of cone penetration (mm/ 10) was determined both for the pinion bearing and for the commutator armature bearing, resulting in the following data:

Motor

1 2 3 4 5 6

Commutator 211 273 305 258 270 209

Pinion 266 278 259 244 273 236

Motor

7 8 9 10 11 12

Commutator 223 288 296 233 262 291

Pinion 290 287 315 242 288 242

Motor

13 14 15 16 17

Commutator 278 275 210 272 264

Pinion 278 208 281 274 268

Calculate an estimate of the population mean difference between penetration for the commutator armature bearing and penetration for the pinion bearing, and do so in a way that conveys information about the reliability and precision of the estimate. (Note: A normal probability plot validates the necessary normality assumption.) Would you say that the population mean difference has been precisely estimated? Does it look as though population mean penetration differs for the two types of bearings? Explain.

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.