/*! 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 65 An urban community would like to... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

An urban community would like to show that the incidence of breast cancer is higher than in a nearbyrural area. (PCB levels were found to be higher in the soil of the urban community.) If it is found that 20 of 200 adult women in the urban community have breast cancer and 10 of 150 adult women in the rural commus nity have breast cancer, can we conclude at the 0.05 level of significance that breast cancer is more prevalent in the urban community?

Short Answer

Expert verified
At the 0.05 level of significance, one cannot conclude that breast cancer is more prevalent in the urban community.

Step by step solution

01

Determine the Incidence Rates

Calculate the incidence of breast cancer for both communities. For the urban community the rate is \( \frac{20}{200} = 0.1 \), and for the rural community it is \( \frac{10}{150} = 0.067 \).
02

Set Up the Hypotheses

Define the null hypothesis \(H_0\) as 'the incidence of breast cancer is the same in both communities', and the alternative hypothesis \(H_1\) as 'the incidence of breast cancer is higher in the urban community'.
03

Calculate the Test Statistic

The z score can be calculated using the formula \( Z = \frac{(P_1- P_2)}{\sqrt{P(1-P)(\frac{1}{n_1}+\frac{1}{n_2})}} \) where \(P_1\) and \(P_2\) are the proportions of breast cancer incidents in the urban and rural communities, \(n_1\) and \(n_2\) the sample sizes, and \(P\) is the combined proportion. So, \( P1 = 0.1, P2 = 0.067, n1 = 200, n2 = 150 \) and \( P = \frac{20+10}{200+150} = 0.08 \). Substituting these values in the equation yields a Z score of 0.779.
04

Compare the Test Statistic to the Critical Value

For a one-sided test (since we're only interested in whether the urban rate is higher), the critical z-value at the 0.05 level of significance is 1.645. Since our calculated z-value (0.779) is less than 1.645, we do not reject the null hypothesis.

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!

Key Concepts

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

Z-Test
A Z-test is a type of statistical test that is used to determine if there is a significant difference between the means or proportions of two groups. It's specifically useful in comparing two proportions, like in the present scenario with breast cancer rates in different communities. The Z-test helps establish whether any differences observed are statistically significant or just due to random chance.

Here, the Z-test is applied to the breast cancer incidence rates of urban and rural communities. It compares the collected data from both groups to see if the urban community's rate significantly exceeds the rural one. The essence of conducting a Z-test involves calculating the z-score, which tells you how far and in which direction your sample proportion departs from the null hypothesis expectation in standard deviation units.
  • First, gather your data samples, like here with 20 out of 200 urban women and 10 out of 150 rural women diagnosed with breast cancer.
  • Calculate the incidence rates (proportions) for comparison.
  • Use the given formula for Z to obtain the z-score.
  • Compare your calculated z-score to the critical z-value from the Z-distribution table to make a conclusion about the hypothesis.
The Z-test requires certain conditions, usually involving a sufficiently large sample size, for the central limit theorem to apply and ensure results are reliable.
Incidence Rate
The incidence rate is an important statistical measure that refers to the frequency with which a disease appears in a particular population during a specified time period. In our exercise, it is calculated to understand the proportion of breast cancer cases in two different communities - urban and rural.

Calculating the incidence rate is a simple yet valuable tool in public health to identify how common a disease is in a specific area. The formula is straightforward and consists of dividing the number of new cases by the total population at risk. For the urban area with 20 cases in 200 women, the incidence rate would be \(0.1\), whereas, in the rural area with 10 cases in 150 women, it is \(0.067\).
  • Helps in identifying high risk areas or groups within a population.
  • Used for informing public health interventions and resource allocation.
  • Essential for comparing rates across different populations to understand broader health impacts.
Understanding incidence rates aids in drawing conclusions and conducting further statistical tests, such as the Z-test in this context.
Null Hypothesis
The null hypothesis, often denoted as \(H_0\), is a statement made for statistical purposes indicating that there is no effect or difference between groups, and any observed effect is due to sampling or experimental error. It serves as a starting point for statistical testing.

In the exercise scenario, the null hypothesis posits that there is no difference in breast cancer incidence rates between the urban and rural communities. It is a conservative assumption where, unless sufficient evidence is presented against it, it remains accepted.
  • Provides a benchmark against which alternative claims can be tested.
  • Acts as the default or baseline assumption in hypothesis testing.
  • Aids in determining the statistical significance of results by comparing calculated test statistics to critical values.
Rejecting the null hypothesis implies supporting the alternative hypothesis, contingent on the evidence provided by the test results.
Alternative Hypothesis
An alternative hypothesis, often denoted as \(H_1\) or \(H_A\), makes a claim that there is a real effect or difference that is not due to chance or random sampling. In hypothesis testing, it stands as a counterpart to the null hypothesis.

For the exercise, the alternative hypothesis is that the incidence rate of breast cancer is indeed higher in the urban community compared to the rural one. This hypothesis reflects what the study aims to demonstrate or prove based on collected data.
  • Acts as the working hypothesis the test is trying to substantiate.
  • When the test results show statistically significant differences, the null hypothesis can be rejected in favor of the alternative one.
  • Forms the basis for research studies aiming to explore new claims or relationships in data.
Whether or not to accept the alternative hypothesis depends heavily on the result of the test statistic, which should exceed the critical value set for concluding statistical significance.

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

In the publication Relief from Arthritis by Thorsons Publishers L.td. John E Croft claims that over \(40 \%\) of the sufferers from osteoarthritis received measurable relief from an ingredient produced by a particular species of mussel found off the eoust of New Zealand. To test this claim, the mussel extract is to be given to a group of 7 osteonrthritic patients. If or more of the patients roccive relief, we shall not re-ject the null hypothesis that \(p=0.4\); otherwise, we conclude that \(p<0.4\) (a) Evaluate a, assuming that \(p=0.4\). (b) Evaluate \(\beta\) for the alternative \(p=0.3\).

A study at the University of Colorado at Boul. der shows that running increases the percent resting metabolic rate (RMR) in older women. The average RMR of 30 elderly women runners was \(34.0 \%\) higher than the average RMR of 30 sedentary elderly women and the standard deviations were reported to be \(10.5 \%\) and \(10.2 \%\), respectively. Was there a significant increase in RMR of the women runners over the sedentary women? Assume the populations to be approximately normally distributed with equal variances. Use a P-value in your conclusions.

Large-Sample Test of \(a^{2}=\sigma_{0}^{2}\). When \(n \geq\) 30 we can test the null hypothesis that \(\sigma^{2}=a_{5}^{2}\) or \(\sigma-\) (Ta, by computing $$z=\frac{s+\sigma_{0}}{\sigma_{0} / \sqrt{2 n}}$$ which is a value of a random variable whose sampling distribution is approximately the standard normal distribution (a) With reference to Example 10.5 , test at the 0.05 level of significance whether \(\sigma=10.0\) years against the alternative that \(\sigma \neq 10.0\) years. (b) It is suspected that the variance of the distribution of distances in kilometers achieved per 5 liters of fuel by a new automobile model equipped with a diesel engine is less than the variance of the distribution of distances achieved by the same model equipped with a six-cylinder gasoline engine, which is known to be \(\sigma^{2}=6.25\). If 72 test runs in the diesel model have a variance of 4.41 , ean we conclude at the 0.05 level of significance that the variance of the distances achicved by the: diesel model is less than that of the gasoline model?

10.112 In a study conducted by the Department of Mechanical Engineering and analyzed by the Statistics Consulting Center at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, the steel rods supplied by two different companies were compared. Ten sample springs were made out of the steel rods supplied by each company and the "bounciness" was studied. The data are as follows: Company A: $$\begin{array}{llllllllll}9.3 & 8.8 & 6.8 & 8.7 & 8.5 & 6.7 & 8.0 & 6.5 & 9.2 & 7.0\end{array}$$ Company B: \(\begin{array}{llllllllll}11.0 & 9.8 & 9.9 & 10.2 & 10.1 & 9.7 & 11.0 & 11.1 & 10.2 & 9.6\end{array}\) Can you conclude that there is virtually no difference in means between the steel rods supplied by the two companies? Use a P-value to reach your conclusion. Should variances be pooled here?

Amslat Neus (December 2004) lists median salaries for associate professors of statistics at research institutions and at liberal arts and other institutions in the United States. Assume a sample of 200 associate professors from research institutions having an average salary of \(\$ 70.750\) per year with a standard deviation of S6000. Assume also a sample of 200 associate professors from other types of institutions having an average salary of \(\$ 65,200\) with a standard deviation of \(\$ 5000\) Test the hypothesis that the mean salary for associate professors in research institutions is \(\$ 2000\) higher than for those in other institutions. Use a 0.01 level of significance

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.