/*! 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} Q53 E Olestra is a fat substitute appr... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Olestra is a fat substitute approved by the FDA for use in snack foods. Because there have been anecdotal reports of gastrointestinal problems associated with olestra consumption, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled experiment was carried out to compare olestra potato chips to regular potato chips with respect to GI symptoms ("Gastrointestinal Symptoms Following Consumption of Olestra or Regular Triglyceride Potato Chips," J. of the Amer. Med. Assoc., 1998: 150-152). Among 529 individuals in the TG control group, 17.6 % experienced an adverse GI event, whereas among the 563 individuals in the olestra treatment group, 15.8 % experienced such an event.

a. Carry out a test of hypotheses at the 5 % significance level to decide whether the incidence rate of GI problems for those who consume olestra chips according to the experimental regimen differs from the incidence rate for the TG control treatment.

b. If the true percentages for the two treatments were 15 % and 20 %, respectively, what sample sizes

\((m = n\)) would be necessary to detect such a difference with probability 90?

Short Answer

Expert verified

(a) There is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that the incidence rate of Gl problems for those who consume olestra chips according to the experimental regimen differs from the incidence rate for the TG control group.

(b) \(n = 1211\)\(\)

Step by step solution

01

To determine the value of the test statistic

Given:

a)

\(\begin{array}{l}{{\hat p}_1} = 17.6\% = 0.176\\{n_1} = 529\\{{\hat p}_2} = 15.8\% = 0.158\\{n_2} = 563\\\alpha = 5\% = 0.05\end{array}\)

(a) Claim: \({p_1} \ne {p_2}\)

The claim is either the null hypothesis or the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis states an equality. Since the null hypothesis is not the claim, the alternative hypothesis is the claim.

\(\begin{array}{l}{H_0}:{p_1} = {p_2}\\{H_a}:{p_1} \ne {p_2}\end{array}\)

The sample proportion is the number of successes divided by the sample size:

\(\begin{array}{l}{x_1} = {{\hat p}_1}{n_1} = 0.176(529) \approx 93\\{x_2} = {{\hat p}_2}{n_2} = 0.158(563) \approx 89\end{array}\)

\({\hat p_p} = \frac{{{x_1} + {x_2}}}{{{n_1} + {n_2}}} = \frac{{93 + 89}}{{529 + 563}} = \frac{1}{6} \approx 0.1667\)

The critical values are the values corresponding to a probability of \(0.025/0.975\) in table A.3:

\(z = \pm 1.96\)

The rejection region then contains all values below -1.96 and all values above 1.96.

Determine the value of the test statistic:

\(z = \frac{{{{\hat p}_1} - {{\hat p}_2}}}{{\sqrt {{{\hat p}_p}\left( {1 - {{\hat p}_p}} \right)} \sqrt {\frac{1}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{1}{{{n_2}}}} }} = \frac{{0.176 - 0.158}}{{\sqrt {0.1667(1 - 0.1667)} \sqrt {\frac{1}{{529}} + \frac{1}{{563}}} }} \approx 0.80\)

If the value of the test statistic is within the rejection region, then the null hypothesis is rejected:

\( - 1.96 < 0.80 < 1.96 \Rightarrow {\rm{ Fail to reject }}{H_0}\)

There is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that the incidence rate of Gl problems for those who consume olestra chips according to the experimental regimen differs from the incidence rate for the TG control group.

02

To find the n value for the given sample sizes

(b) Given: Sample sizes are equal.

\(\begin{array}{l}{p_1} = 15\% = 0.15\\{p_2} = 20\% = 0.20\\P\left( {{\rm{ Reject }}{H_0}\mid {H_0}{\rm{ false }}} \right) = 0.90\end{array}\)

\({q_1}\)is the complement of \({p_1}\)and \({q_2}\)is the complement of \({p_2}\).

\(\begin{array}{l}{q_1} = 1 - {p_1} = 1 - 0.15 = 0.85\\{q_2} = 1 - {p_2} = 1 - 0.20 = 0.80\end{array}\)

\(\beta \)is the probability of not rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis \({H_0}\)is false (use the complement rule):

\(\beta = 1 - P\left( {{\rm{ Reject }}{H_0}\mid {H_0}{\rm{ false }}} \right) = 1 - 0.90 = 0.10\)

The critical value of the significance level \(\alpha \) is the value corresponding to a probability of \(\alpha /2 = 0.025\) in table A.3:

\({z_{\alpha /2}} = 1.96\)

The critical value of the probability of a type II error \(\beta \) is the value corresponding to a probability of 0.10 in table A.3:

\({z_\beta } = 1.28\)

\(d\)is the difference in population means:

\(d = {p_1} - {p_2} = 0.15 - 0.20 = - 0.05\)

Formula sample size:

Fill in the known values and evaluate (round up!):\(n = {\frac{{1.96\sqrt {(0.15 + 0.20)(0.85 + 0.80)/2} + 1.28\sqrt {0.15(0.85) + 0.20(0.80)} }}{{{{( - 0.05)}^2}}}^2} \approx 1211\)\(\)\(\)

03

Final proof

(a) There is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that the incidence rate of Gl problems for those who consume olestra chips according to the experimental regimen differs from the incidence rate for the TG control group.

(b) \(n = 1211\)\(\)

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

Quantitative noninvasive techniques are needed for routinely assessing symptoms of peripheral neuropathies, such as carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The article "A Gap Detection Tactility Test for Sensory Deficits Associated with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome" (Ergonomics, \(1995: 2588 - 2601\)) reported on a test that involved sensing a tiny gap in an otherwise smooth surface by probing with a finger; this functionally resembles many work-related tactile activities, such as detecting scratches or surface defects. When finger probing was not allowed, the sample average gap detection threshold for\(m = 8\)normal subjects was\(1.71\;mm\), and the sample standard deviation was\(.53\); for\(n = 10\)CTS subjects, the sample mean and sample standard deviation were\(2.53\)and\(.87\), respectively. Does this data suggest that the true average gap detection threshold for CTS subjects exceeds that for normal subjects? State and test the relevant hypotheses using a significance level of\(.01\).

Construct a paired data set for which\(t = \infty \), so that the data is highly significant when the correct analysis is used, yet \(t\) for the two-sample \(t\)test is quite near zero, so the incorrect analysis yields an insignificant result.

Sometimes experiments involving success or failure responses are run in a paired or before/after manner. Suppose that before a major policy speech by a political candidate, n individuals are selected and asked whether \((S)\)or not (F) they favor the candidate. Then after the speech the same n people are asked the same question. The responses can be entered in a table as follows:

Before

After

S

F

S

\({{\bf{X}}_{\bf{1}}}\)

\({{\bf{X}}_{\bf{2}}}\)

F

\({{\bf{X}}_{\bf{3}}}\)

\({{\bf{X}}_{\bf{4}}}\)

Where\({{\bf{x}}_{\bf{1}}}{\bf{ + }}{{\bf{x}}_{\bf{2}}}{\bf{ + }}{{\bf{x}}_{\bf{3}}}{\bf{ + }}{{\bf{x}}_{\bf{4}}}{\bf{ = n}}\). Let\({{\bf{p}}_{\bf{1}}}{\bf{,}}{{\bf{p}}_{\bf{2}}}{\bf{,}}{{\bf{p}}_{\bf{3}}}\), and \({p_4}\)denote the four cell probabilities, so that \({p_1} = P(S\) before and S after), and so on. We wish to test the hypothesis that the true proportion of supporters (S) after the speech has not increased against the alternative that it has increased.

a. State the two hypotheses of interest in terms of\({p_1},{p_2}\),\({p_3}\), and \({p_4}\).

b. Construct an estimator for the after/before difference in success probabilities

c. When n is large, it can be shown that the rv \(\left( {{{\bf{X}}_{\bf{i}}}{\bf{ - }}{{\bf{X}}_{\bf{j}}}} \right){\bf{/n}}\) has approximately a normal distribution with variance given by\(\left[ {{{\bf{p}}_{\bf{i}}}{\bf{ + }}{{\bf{p}}_{\bf{j}}}{\bf{ - }}{{\left( {{{\bf{p}}_{\bf{i}}}{\bf{ - }}{{\bf{p}}_{\bf{j}}}} \right)}^{\bf{2}}}} \right]{\bf{/n}}\). Use this to construct a test statistic with approximately a standard normal distribution when \({H_0}\)is true (the result is called McNemar's test).

d. If\({{\bf{x}}_{\bf{1}}}{\bf{ = 350,}}\;\;\;{{\bf{x}}_{\bf{2}}}{\bf{ = 150,}}\;\;\;{{\bf{x}}_{\bf{3}}}{\bf{ = 200}}\), and\({x_4} = 300\), what do you conclude?

The National Health Statistics Reports dated Oct. \(22,2008\), included the following information on the heights (in.) for non-Hispanic white females:

Sample sample Std. Error

Age Size Mean Mean

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{l}}{20 - 39}&{866}&{64.9}&{.09}\\{60 and older }&{934}&{63.1}&{.11}\\{}&{}&{}&{}\end{array}\)

  1. Calculate and interpret a confidence interval at confidence level approximately \(95\% \) for the difference between population mean height for the younger women and that for the older women.
  2. Let \({\mu _1}\) denote the population mean height for those aged \(20 - 39\) and \({\mu _2}\) denote the population mean height for those aged 60 and older. Interpret the hypotheses \({H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = 1 and {H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} > 1,\) and then carry out a test of these hypotheses at significance level \(.001\)
  3. Based on the \(p\)-value calculated in (b) would you reject the null hypothesis at any reasonable significance level? Explain your reasoning.
  4. What hypotheses would be appropriate if \({\mu _1}\) referred to the older age group, \({\mu _2}\) to the younger age group, and you wanted to see if there was compelling evidence for concluding that the population mean height for younger women exceeded that for older women by more than \(1\)in.?

In an experiment to compare bearing strengths of pegs inserted in two different types of mounts, a sample of 14 observations on stress limit for red oak mounts resulted in a sample mean and sample standard deviation of \(8.48MPa\) and .79 MPa, respectively, whereas a sample of 12 observations when Douglas fir mounts were used gave a mean of \(9.36\) and a standard deviation of \(1.52\) ('Bearing Strength of White Oak Pegs in Red Oak and Douglas Fir Timbers," J. of Testing and Evaluation, 1998, 109-114). Consider testing whether or not true average stress limits are identical for the two types of mounts. Compare df's and P-values for the unpooled and pooled t tests.

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.