/*! 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 2 The National Health Statistics R... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

The National Health Statistics Reports dated Oct. \(22 .\) 2008 , included the following information on the heights (in.) for non-Hispanic white females: \begin{tabular}{lccc} Age & Sample Size & Sample Mean & Std. Error Mean \\ \hline \(20-39\) & 866 & \(64.9\) & \(.09\) \\ 60 and older & 934 & \(63.1\) & \(.11\) \\ \hline \end{tabular} a. 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. b. 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 \(H_{a}: \mu_{1}-\mu_{2}>1\), c. Based on the \(P\)-value calculated in (b) would you reject the null hypothesis at any reasonable significance level? Explain your reasoning. d. 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.?

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. CI: [1.522, 2.078] b. Meaning: Expect height difference 鈮 1 inch c. Yes, reject at any level d. Use H_0: 碌鈧-碌鈧 = 1, H_a: 碌鈧-碌鈧 > 1

Step by step solution

01

Calculate the Standard Error for the Difference in Means

To calculate the standard error for the difference in means, use the formula:\[SE_{diff} = \sqrt{(SE_1)^2 + (SE_2)^2}\]where \(SE_1 = 0.09\) and \(SE_2 = 0.11\). Thus,\[SE_{diff} = \sqrt{(0.09)^2 + (0.11)^2} = \sqrt{0.0081 + 0.0121} = \sqrt{0.0202} \approx 0.142\]
02

Find the 95% Confidence Interval for the Difference

The 95% confidence interval is given by:\[(\overline{X}_1 - \overline{X}_2) \pm z^* \cdot SE_{diff}\]where \(\overline{X}_1 = 64.9\), \(\overline{X}_2 = 63.1\), and \(z^*\) for 95% confidence is approximately 1.96. Thus,\[64.9 - 63.1 \pm 1.96 \times 0.142 = 1.8 \pm 0.278\]This results in the interval \([1.522, 2.078]\). This means we are 95% confident that the actual difference in population means falls within this interval.
03

Interpret Hypotheses for Given Conditions

\(H_0: \mu_1 - \mu_2 = 1\) means the difference in population means is hypothesized to be exactly 1 inch. \(H_a: \mu_1 - \mu_2 > 1\) means we believe the difference is greater than 1 inch. We test to see if this greater difference is supported by data.
04

P-Value Calculation for Hypothesis Test

For \(H_a: \mu_1 - \mu_2 > 1\), the test statistic is:\[Z = \frac{(\overline{X}_1 - \overline{X}_2) - 1}{SE_{diff}} = \frac{1.8 - 1}{0.142} \approx 5.63\]A Z-score of 5.63 corresponds to a very small P-value (less than 0.05), leading us to reject \(H_0\) at any reasonable significance level.
05

Formulate Hypotheses with Reversed Roles

If \(\mu_1\) refers to the older group and \(\mu_2\) to the younger group, and we want to show that the younger group is taller by more than 1 inch, we set:\(H_0: \mu_2 - \mu_1 = 1\) \(H_a: \mu_2 - \mu_1 > 1\). These hypotheses align with testing if younger women are on average more than 1 inch taller than older women.

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 91影视!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Standard Error
The standard error is an important statistic that provides insight into how much the sample mean is expected to vary from the true population mean. It's like a measure of the precision of our sample mean. In the context of the exercise, the standard error helps us understand the variability in the height measurements of women in different age groups.

When calculating the standard error for the difference in means, we use the formula: \[SE_{diff} = \sqrt{(SE_1)^2 + (SE_2)^2}\]This formula considers the standard errors of both groups involved in the comparison. It accounts for the combined uncertainty in measuring each group's mean height.

Smaller standard errors suggest that our sample mean is a good estimate of the population mean. In this exercise, a calculated standard error of about 0.142 indicates relatively low variability in mean height differences, making our results fairly reliable.
Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis testing is all about making informed decisions based on data. It provides a structured way to evaluate claims or hypotheses about population parameters, such as means or proportions.

In the exercise, our hypotheses were: \(H_0: \mu_1 - \mu_2 = 1\) and \(H_a: \mu_1 - \mu_2 >1\). - **Null Hypothesis \(H_0\)**: This is the assumption that the null (no effect) condition is true. Here, it means that the difference in population mean heights is exactly 1 inch.
- **Alternative Hypothesis \(H_a\)**: This suggests that there is an effect, specifically that the average height difference is greater than 1 inch.

We aim to gather evidence to either support or reject the null hypothesis. If the data show a likelihood that the alternative hypothesis is true, we may reject \(H_0\). This structured testing ensures our conclusions are data-driven rather than based on assumptions.
P-value Interpretation
The P-value is a crucial component in hypothesis testing, as it helps us make decisions about the null hypothesis. It measures the strength of evidence against the null hypothesis, giving us an indication of whether our observed data could occur by random chance.

In the context of the exercise, we calculated a Z-score to determine the likelihood that our observed difference (1.8 inches) could happen if the null hypothesis (\(\mu_1 - \mu_2 = 1\)) were true. A Z-score of 5.63 produced a very small P-value, often less than 0.05, an arbitrary threshold used for significance.

If the P-value is small, it suggests that the observed result is unlikely under the null hypothesis, leading us to reject \(H_0\). In simple terms, a small P-value gives us confidence that there鈥檚 a statistically significant difference greater than the hypothesized 1 inch.
Population Mean Difference
Understanding the concept of population mean difference is vital when comparing two groups. This value represents the average gap between the population means of these groups. In research, it helps identify whether different populations are experiencing measurable changes or differences.

In our exercise, the population mean difference between younger and older non-Hispanic white females is crucial because it helps determine if age affects average height. Here's what this tells us:
  • A calculated difference of 1.8 inches suggests, on average, that younger women might be taller than older women.
  • Based on statistical analysis, this difference is statistically significant.
Understanding the population mean difference helps in interpreting real-world implications, such as policy-making or health guidelines. In this study, the confidence interval gives further assurance by confirming that the true mean difference likely falls between 1.522 and 2.078 inches, reinforcing the idea that younger women could be taller than their older counterparts.

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

Consider the following two questions designed to assess quantitative literacy: a. What is \(15 \%\) of 1000 ? b. A store is offering a \(15 \%\) off sale on all TVs. The most popular television is normally priced at \(\$ 1000\). How much money would a customer save on the television during this sale? Suppose the first question is asked of 200 randomly selected college students, with 164 answering correctly; the second one is asked of a different random sample of 200 college students, resulting in 140 correct responses (the sample percentages agree with those given in the article "Using the Right Yardstick: Assessing Financial Literacy Measures by Way of Financial Well-Being," J. of Consumer Affairs, 2013: 243-262; the investigators found that those who answered such questions correctly, particularly questions with context, were significantly more successful in their investment decisions than those who did not answer correctly). Carry out a test of hypotheses at significance level . 05 to decide if the true proportion of correct responses to the question without context exceeds that for the one with context.

26\. The article "'The Influence of Corrosion Inhibitor and Surface Abrasion on the Failure of Aluminum-Wired Twist-On Connections" (IEEE Trans. on Components, Hybrids, and Manuf. Tech.s, 1984: 20-25) reported data on potential drop measurements for one sample of connectors wired with alloy aluminum and another sample wired with \(\mathrm{EC}\) aluminum. Does the accompanying SAS output suggest that the true average potential drop for alloy connections (type 1) is higher than that wfor EC connections (as stated in the article)? Carry out the appropriate test using a significance level of .01. In reaching your conclusion, what type of error might you have committed? [Note: SAS reports the \(P\)-value for a two-tailed test.] \(\begin{array}{lrrrr}\text { Type } & N & \text { Mean } & \text { Std Dev } & \text { Std Error } \\ 1 & 20 & 17.49900000 & 0.55012821 & 0.12301241 \\ 2 & 20 & 16.90000000 & 0.48998389 & 0.10956373 \\ & \text { Variances } & T & \text { DF } & \text { Prob> }|T| \\ & \text { Unequal } & 3.6362 & 37.5 & 0.0008 \\ & \text { Equal } & 3.6362 & 38.0 & 0.0008\end{array}\)

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 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. \(\begin{array}{rrrrrrrr}\geq 93: & 100 & 100 & 60 & 135 & 195 & 195 & \\ & 125 & 135 & 95 & 42 & 75 & 72 & \\ \leq 89: & 80 & 75 & 75 & 85 & 75 & 35 & 85 \\ & 65 & 45 & 100 & 28 & 38 & 50 & 28\end{array}\) 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?

Is there any systematic tendency for part-time college faculty to hold their students to different standards than do full-time faculty? The article "Are There Instructional Differences Between Full-Time and Part-Time Faculty?" (College Teaching, 2009: 23-26) reported that for a sample of 125 courses taught by fulltime faculty, the mean course GPA was \(2.7186\) and the standard deviation was \(.63342\), whereas for a sample of 88 courses taught by part- timers, the mean and standard deviation were \(2.8639\) and \(.49241\), respectively. Does it appear that true average course GPA for part-time faculty differs from that for faculty teaching full-time? Test the appropriate hypotheses at significance level .01.

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.