/*! 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} Q88 SE The paper "'Quantitative Assessm... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

The paper "'Quantitative Assessment of Glenohumeral Translation in Baseball Players" (The Amer.J. of Sports Med., 2004: 1711-1715) considered various aspects of shoulder motion for a sample of pitchers and another sample of position players [glenohumeral refers to the articulation between the humerus (ball) and the glenoid (socket)]. The authors kindly supplied the following data on anteroposterior translation (mm), a measure of the extent of anterior and posterior motion, both for the dominant arm and the nondominant arm.

a. Estimate the true average difference in translation between dominant and nondominant arms for pitchers in a way that conveys information about reliability and precision, and interpret the resulting estimate.

b. Repeat (a) for position players.

c. The authors asserted that "pitchers have greater difference in side-to-side anteroposterior translation of their shoulders compared with position players." Do you agree? Explain.

Short Answer

Expert verified

(a)\((2.0330,6.1000)\)

(b) \(( - 0.5402,1.0054)\)

(c) Pitchers appear to have greater difference in side-to-side anteroposterior translation of their shoulders compared with position players.

Step by step solution

01

Step 1: Estimate the true average difference in translation between dominant and nondominant arms for pitchers

Let us assume

\(c = 95\% = 0.95\)

Other confidence levels can be determined similarly.

(a) Given:

\(n = 17\)

Determine the difference in value of each pair.

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}{|{\rm{ sample }}1}&{{\rm{ sample 2}}}&{{\rm{ Difference D}}}\\{27.63}&{24.33}&{3.3}\\{30.57}&{26.36}&{4.21}\\{32.62}&{30.62}&2\\{39.79}&{33.74}&{6.05}\\{28.5}&{29.84}&{ - 1.34}\\{26.7}&{26.71}&{ - 0.01}\\{30.34}&{26.45}&{3.89}\\{28.69}&{21.49}&{7.2}\\{31.19}&{20.82}&{10.37}\\{36}&{21.75}&{14.25}\\{31.58}&{28.32}&{3.26}\\{32.55}&{27.22}&{5.33}\\{29.56}&{28.86}&{0.7}\\{28.64}&{28.58}&{0.06}\\{28.58}&{27.15}&{1.43}\\{31.99}&{29.46}&{2.53}\\{27.16}&{21.26}&{5.9}\\{{\rm{ Mean }}}&{}&{4.0665}\\{sd}&{}&{3.9549}\end{array}\)

Determine the sample mean of the differences. The mean is the sum of all values divided by the number of values.

\(\bar d = \frac{{3.3 + 4.21 + 2 + \ldots + 1.43 + 2.53 + 5.9}}{{17}} \approx 4.0665\)

Determine the sample standard deviation of the differences:

\({s_d} = \sqrt {\frac{{{{(3.3 - 4.0665)}^2} + \ldots + {{(5.9 - 4.0665)}^2}}}{{17 - 1}}} \approx 3.9549\)

Determine the \({t_{\alpha /2}}\)using the Student's T distribution table in the appendix with $d f=n-1=17-1=16:

\({t_{0.025}} = 2.120\)

The margin of error is then:

\(E = {t_{\alpha /2}} \cdot \frac{{{s_d}}}{{\sqrt n }} = 2.120 \cdot \frac{{3.9549}}{{\sqrt {17} }} \approx 2.0335\)

The endpoints of the confidence interval for \({\mu _d}\)are:

\(\begin{array}{l}\bar d - E = 4.0665 - 2.0335 = 2.0330\\\bar d + E = 4.0665 + 2.0335 = 6.1000\end{array}\)

We are 95 % confident that the true average difference in translation between dominant and nondominant arms for pitchers is between 2.0330 and 6.1000.

02

Step 2: Estimate the true average difference in translation between dominant and nondominant arms for position players

(b) Given:

\(n = 19\)

Determine the difference in value of each pair.

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}{{\rm{ Sample 1 }}}&{{\rm{ Sample 2 }}}&{{\rm{ Difference D }}}\\{30.31}&{32.54}&{ - 2.23}\\{44.86}&{40.95}&{3.91}\\{22.09}&{23.48}&{ - 1.39}\\{31.26}&{31.11}&{0.15}\\{28.07}&{28.75}&{ - 0.68}\\{31.93}&{29.32}&{2.61}\\{34.68}&{34.79}&{ - 0.11}\\{29.1}&{28.87}&{0.23}\\{25.51}&{27.59}&{ - 2.08}\\{22.49}&{21.01}&{1.48}\\{28.74}&{30.31}&{ - 1.57}\\{27.89}&{27.92}&{ - 0.03}\\{28.48}&{27.85}&{0.63}\\{25.51}&{27.59}&{ - 2.08}\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}{22.49}&{21.01}&{1.48}\\{28.74}&{30.31}&{ - 1.57}\\{27.89}&{27.92}&{ - 0.03}\\{28.48}&{27.85}&{0.63}\\{25.6}&{24.95}&{0.65}\\{20.21}&{21.59}&{ - 1.38}\\{33.77}&{32.48}&{1.29}\\{32.59}&{32.48}&{0.11}\\{32.6}&{31.61}&{0.99}\\{29.3}&{27.46}&{1.84}\end{array}\)

Mean 0.2326

Sd 1.6034

\(\begin{array}{l}{\rm{Determine the sample mean of the differences}}{\rm{. The mean is the sum of all values }}\\{\rm{divided by the number of values}}{\rm{. }}\end{array}\)

\(\bar d = \frac{{ - 2.23 + 3.91 - 1.39 + \ldots + 0.11 + 0.99 + 1.84}}{{19}} \approx 0.2326\)

Determine the sample standard deviation of the differences:

\({s_d} = \sqrt {\frac{{{{( - 2.23 - 0.2326)}^2} + \ldots + {{(1.84 - 0.2326)}^2}}}{{19 - 1}}} \approx 1.6034\)

Determine the \({t_{\alpha /2}}\)using the Student's T distribution table in the appendix with \(df = n - 1\)=19-1=18:

\({t_{0.025}} = 2.101\)

The margin of error is then:

\(E = {t_{\alpha /2}} \cdot \frac{{{s_d}}}{{\sqrt n }} = 2.101 \cdot \frac{{1.6034}}{{\sqrt {19} }} \approx 0.7728\)

The endpoints of the confidence interval for \({\mu _d}\) are:

\(\begin{array}{l}\bar d - E = 0.2326 - 0.7728 = - 0.5402\\\bar d + E = 0.2326 + 0.7728 = 1.0054\end{array}\)

We are 95 % confident that the true average difference in translation between dominant and nondominant arms for position players is between \( - 0.5402\) and\(1.0054\).

03

Final proof 

(c) Pitchers appear to have greater difference in side-to-side anteroposterior translation of their shoulders compared with position players, because the confidence interval in part (a) lies completely above the confidence interval in part (b).

Finally we get,

(a)\((2.0330,6.1000)\)

(b) \(( - 0.5402,1.0054)\)

(c) Pitchers appear to have greater difference in side-to-side anteroposterior translation of their shoulders compared with position players.

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

Suppose a level .05 test of \({H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = 0\) versus \({H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} > 0\) is to be performed, assuming \((m = n)\)\({\sigma _1} = {\sigma _2} = \)10 and normality of both distributions, using equal sample sizes. Evaluate the probability of a type II error when \({\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = 1\) and\(n = 25,100,2500\), and 10,000. Can you think of real problems in which the difference \({\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = 1\)has little practical significance? Would sample sizes of n=10,000 be desirable in such problems?

An experiment was performed to compare the fracture toughness of high-purity \(18Ni\) maraging steel with commercial-purity steel of the same type (Corrosion Science, 1971: 723–736). For \(m = 32\)specimens, the sample average toughness was \(\overline x = 65.6\) for the high purity steel, whereas for \(n = 38\)specimens of commercial steel \(\overline y = 59.8\). Because the high-purity steel is more expensive, its use for a certain application can be justified only if its fracture toughness exceeds that of commercial purity steel by more than 5. Suppose that both toughness distributions are normal.

a. Assuming that \({\sigma _1} = 1.2\) and \({\sigma _2} = 1.1\), test the relevant hypotheses using \(\alpha = .001\).

b. Compute \(\beta \) for the test conducted in part (a) when \({\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = 6.\)

The article "Urban Battery Litter" cited in Example 8.14 gave the following summary data on zinc mass (g) for two different brands of size D batteries:

Brand Sample Size Sample Mean Sample SD

Duracell 15 138.52 7.76

Energizer 20 149.07 1.52

Assuming that both zinc mass distributions are at least approximately normal, carry out a test at significance level .05 to decide whether true average zinc mass is different for the two types of batteries.

The accompanying data consists of prices (\$) for one sample of California cabernet sauvignon wines that received ratings of 93 or higher in the May 2013 issue of Wine Spectator and another sample of California cabernets that received ratings of 89 or lower in the same issue.

\(\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}{ \ge 93:}&{100}&{100}&{60}&{135}&{195}&{195}&{}\\{}&{125}&{135}&{95}&{42}&{75}&{72}&{}\\{ \le 89:}&{80}&{75}&{75}&{85}&{75}&{35}&{85}\\{}&{65}&{45}&{100}&{28}&{38}&{50}&{28}\end{array}\)

Assume that these are both random samples of prices from the population of all wines recently reviewed that received ratings of at least 93 and at most 89 , respectively.

a. Investigate the plausibility of assuming that both sampled populations are normal.

b. Construct a comparative boxplot. What does it suggest about the difference in true average prices?

c. Calculate a confidence interval at the\(95\% \)confidence level to estimate the difference between\({\mu _1}\), the mean price in the higher rating population, and\({\mu _2}\), the mean price in the lower rating population. Is the interval consistent with the statement "Price rarely equates to quality" made by a columnist in the cited issue of the magazine?

The article "Evaluating Variability in Filling Operations" (Food Tech., 1984: 51-55) describes two different filling operations used in a ground-beef packing plant. Both filling operations were set to fill packages with \(1400\;g\)of ground beef. In a random sample of size 30 taken from each filling operation, the resulting means and standard deviations were \(1402.24\;g\) and \(10.97\;g\) for operation 1 and \(1419.63\;g\) and \(9.96\;g\) for operation 2.

a. Using a .05 significance level, is there sufficient evidence to indicate that the true mean weight of the packages differs for the two operations?

b. Does the data from operation 1 suggest that the true mean weight of packages produced by operation 1 is higher than\(1400\;g\)? Use a \(.05\)significance level.

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.