/*! 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} Q5 E Persons having Reynaud’s syndr... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Persons having Reynaud’s syndrome are apt to suffer a sudden impairment of blood circulation in fingers and toes. In an experiment to study the extent of this impairment, each subject immersed a forefinger in water and the resulting heat output \((cal/c{m^2}/min)\) was measured. For \(m = 10\) subjects with the syndrome, the average heat output was \(\bar x = .64\), and for \(n = 10\) non-sufferers, the average output was \(2.05\). Let \({\mu _1}\) and \({\mu _2}\) denote the true average heat outputs for the two types of subjects. Assume that the two distributions of heat output are normal with \({\sigma _1} = .2\) and \({\sigma _2} = .4\).

a. Consider testing \({H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 1.0\) versus \({H_2}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} < - 1.0\)at level . \(01\). Describe in words what \({H_a}\) says, and then carry out the test.

b. What is the probability of a type II error when the actual difference between \({\mu _1}\) and \({\mu _2}\) is \({\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 1.2?\)

c. Assuming that \(m = n\), what sample sizes are required to ensure that \(\beta = .1\) when \({\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 1.2?\)

Short Answer

Expert verified

the solution is

a) There is enough data to support the claim that the genuine average heat output of subjects with the syndrome is more than 1 lower than that of subjects without the disease.

b) \(\beta = 0.8212 = 82.12\% \)

c) \({\rm{n = 66}}\)

Step by step solution

01

describe \({H_a}\)a)

\(\begin{array}{l}{{\bar x}_1} = 0.64\\{{\bar x}_2} = 2.05\\{\sigma _1} = 0.2\\{\sigma _2} = 0.4\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{l}{n_1} = {n_2} = 10\\\alpha = 0.01\\{H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 1\end{array}\)

The genuine average heat output of people with the syndrome is one lower than the true average heat output of people who don't have the syndrome.

\({H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} < - 1\)

Subjects with the condition have a genuine average heat output that is more than a factor of one lower than subjects without the disease.

Calculate the test statistic's value:

\(z = \frac{{\left( {{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2}} \right) - \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right)}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{\sigma _1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\sigma _2^2}}{{{n_2}}}} }} = \frac{{(0.64 - 2.05) - ( - 1)}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{0.{2^2}}}{{10}} + \frac{{0.{4^2}}}{{10}}} }} \approx - 2.90\)

If the null hypothesis is true, the P-value is the chance of getting a value that is more extreme or equal to the standardized test statistic $z$. Using the usual probability table, calculate the probability.

\(P = P(Z < - 2.90) = 0.0019\)

The null hypothesis is rejected if the P-value is less than the significance level alpha.

\(P < 0.01 \Rightarrow Reject {H_0}\)

There is enough data to support the claim that the genuine average heat output of subjects with the syndrome is more than 1 lower than that of subjects without the disease.

02

difference between \({\mu _1}\)and \({\mu _2}\)

b)

\(\begin{array}{l}{{\bar x}_1} = 0.64\\{{\bar x}_2} = 2.05\\{\sigma _1} = 0.2\\{\sigma _2} = 0.4\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{l}\alpha = 0.01\\{H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 1\\{H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} < - 1\\{\Delta _a} = - 1.2\end{array}\)

03

calculate mean difference

Using the normal probability table in the appendix, find the \(z\)-score that corresponds to a probability of \(\alpha = 0.01\):

\(z = - 2.33\)

The sample mean difference is calculated by multiplying the population mean difference (of the hypothesis) by the product of the \(z\)-score and the standard deviation:

\(\left( {{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2}} \right) = \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right) - {z_{\alpha /2}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{\sigma _1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\sigma _2^2}}{{{n_2}}}} \bar x = - 1 - 2.33\sqrt {\frac{{0.{2^2}}}{{10}} + \frac{{0.{4^2}}}{{10}}} \approx - 1.3295\)

The \(z\)-value is calculated by dividing the sample mean difference by the population mean difference (alternative mean difference! ), then multiplying by the standard deviation:

\(z = \frac{{{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2} - \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right)}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{\sigma _1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\sigma _2^2}}{{{n_2}}}} }} = \frac{{ - 1.3295 - ( - 1.2)}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{0.{2^2}}}{{10}} + \frac{{0.{4^2}}}{{10}}} }} \approx - 0.92\)

When the null hypothesis is false, the probability of making a Type II error is the probability of not rejecting the null hypothesis. Using the normal probability table in the appendix, calculate the chance of rejecting the null hypothesis.

\(\beta = P(Z > - 0.92) = 1 - P(Z < - 0.92) = 1 - 0.1788 = 0.8212 = 82.12\% \)

04

step 4:calculate mean difference

c)

\(\begin{array}{l}{{\bar x}_1} = 0.64\\{{\bar x}_2} = 2.05\\{\sigma _1} = 0.2\\{\sigma _2} = 0.4\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{l}{n_1} = {n_2} = unknown \\\alpha = 0.01\\{H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 1\\{H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} < - 1\\{\Delta _a} = - 1.2\end{array}\)

\(\beta = 0.10\)

Using the normal probability table in the appendix, find the \({\rm{z}}\)-score that corresponds to a probability of \(\alpha = 0.01\):

\({\rm{z = - 2}}{\rm{.33}}\)

The sample mean difference is calculated by multiplying the population mean difference (of the hypothesis) by the product of the \({\rm{z}}\)-score and the standard deviation:

\(\left( {{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2}} \right) = \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right) + {z_{\alpha /2}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{\sigma _1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\sigma _2^2}}{{{n_2}}}\bar x} = - 1 - 2.33\sqrt {\frac{{0.{2^2}}}{n} + \frac{{0.{4^2}}}{n}} = - 1 - 2.33\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }}\)

Using the normal probability table in the appendix, calculate the \({\rm{z}}\)-score for a probability of \(1 - \beta = 1 - 0.10 = 0.90\):

\(z = 1.28\)

The population mean difference (of the alternative hypothesis) is multiplied by the product of the \({\rm{z}}\)-score and the standard deviation to get the sample mean difference:

\(\left( {{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2}} \right) = \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right) + {z_{\alpha /2}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{\sigma _1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\sigma _2^2}}{{{n_2}}}} \bar x = - 1.2 + 1.28\sqrt {\frac{{0.{2^2}}}{n} + \frac{{0.{4^2}}}{n}} = - 1.2 + 1.28\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }}\)

For the sample mean differences, the two found expressions must be equal:

\( - 1 - 2.33\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }} = - 1.2 + 1.28\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }}\)

05

step 5:simplify

add \(2.33\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }}\) to each side of the equation:

\( - 1 = - 1.2 + 3.61\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }}\)

add \(1.2\) to each side:

\(0.2 = 3.61\frac{{\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{\sqrt n }}\)

multiply each side by \(\sqrt n \)

\(0.2\sqrt n = 3.61\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} \)

divide each side by \(0.2\):

\(\sqrt n = \frac{{3.61\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{0.2}}\)

square each side:

\(n = {\left( {\frac{{3.61\sqrt {0.{2^2} + 0.{4^2}} }}{{0.2}}} \right)^2} \approx 66\)

06

conclusion

a) There is enough data to support the claim that the genuine average heat output of subjects with the syndrome is more than 1 lower than that of subjects without the disease.

b) \(\beta = 0.8212 = 82.12\% \)

c) \({\rm{n = 66}}\)

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

The degenerative disease osteoarthritis most frequently affects weight-bearing joints such as the knee. The article "Evidence of Mechanical Load Redistribution at the Knee Joint in the Elderly When Ascending Stairs and Ramps" (Annals of Biomed. Engr., \(2008: 467 - 476\)) presented the following summary data on stance duration (ms) for samples of both older and younger adults.

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{l}}{Age\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Sample Size\;\;Sample Mean\;\;Sample SD}\\{\;Older\;\;\;\;\;28\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;801\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;117}\\{Younger\;16\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;780\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;72}\end{array}\)

Assume that both stance duration distributions are normal.

a. Calculate and interpret a\(99\% \)CI for true average stance duration among elderly individuals.

b. Carry out a test of hypotheses at significance level\(.05\)to decide whether true average stance duration is larger among elderly individuals than among younger individuals.

Lactation promotes a temporary loss of bone mass to provide adequate amounts of calcium for milk production. The paper "Bone Mass Is Recovered from Lactation to Postweaning in Adolescent Mothers with Low Calcium Intakes" (Amer. J. of Clinical Nutr., 2004: 1322-1326) gave the following data on total body bone mineral content (TBBMC) (g) for a sample both during lactation (L) and in the postweaning period (P).

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}{Subject}&{}&{}&{}&{}&{}&{}&{}&{}&{}\\1&2&3&4&5&6&7&8&9&{10}\\{1928}&{2549}&{2825}&{1924}&{1628}&{2175}&{2114}&{2621}&{1843}&{2541}\\{2126}&{2885}&{2895}&{1942}&{1750}&{2184}&{2164}&{2626}&{2006}&{2627}\end{array}\)

a. Does the data suggest that true average total body bone mineral content during postweaning exceeds that during lactation by more than\(25\;g\)? State and test the appropriate hypotheses using a significance level of .05. (Note: The appropriate normal probability plot shows some curvature but not enough to cast substantial doubt on a normality assumption.)

b. Calculate an upper confidence bound using a\(95\% \)confidence level for the true average difference between TBBMC during postweaning and during lactation.

c. Does the (incorrect) use of the two-sample\(t\)test to test the hypotheses suggested in (a) lead to the same

Anorexia Nervosa (AN) is a psychiatric condition leading to substantial weight loss among women who are fearful of becoming fat. The article "Adipose Tissue Distribution After Weight Restoration and Weight Maintenance in Women with Anorexia Nervosa" (Amer. J. of ClinicalNutr., 2009: 1132-1137) used whole-body magnetic resonance imagery to determine various tissue characteristics for both an AN sample of individuals who had undergone acute weight restoration and maintained their weight for a year and a comparable (at the outset of the study) control sample. Here is summary data on intermuscular adipose tissue (IAT; kg).

Assume that both samples were selected from normal distributions.

a. Calculate an estimate for true average IAT under the described AN protocol, and do so in a way that conveys information about the reliability and precision of the estimation.

b. Calculate an estimate for the difference between true average AN IAT and true average control IAT, and do so in a way that conveys information about the reliability and precision of the estimation. What does your estimate suggest about true average AN IAT relative to true average control IAT?

An experimenter wishes to obtain a CI for the difference between true average breaking strength for cables manufactured by company I and by company II. Suppose breaking strength is normally distributed for both types of cable with s1 5 30 psi and s2 5 20 psi.

  1. If costs dictate that the sample size for the type I cable should be three times the sample size for the type II cable, how many observations are required if the 99% CI is to be no wider than 20 psi?
  2. Suppose a total of 400 observations is to be made. How many of the observations should be made on type I cable samples if the width of the resulting interval is to be a minimum?

Do teachers find their work rewarding and satisfying? The article "Work-Related Attitudes" (Psychological Reports, 1991: \(443 - 450)\)reports the results of a survey of 395 elementary school teachers and 266 high school teachers. Of the elementary school teachers, 224 said they were very satisfied with their jobs, whereas 126 of the high school teachers were very satisfied with their work. Estimate the difference between the proportion of all elementary school teachers who are very satisfied and all high school teachers who are very satisfied by calculating and interpreting a\(CI\).

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.