/*! 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 28 The paper "Passenger and Cell Ph... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

The paper "Passenger and Cell Phone Conversations in Simulated Driving" (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied [2008]: \(392-400\) ) describes an experiment that investigated if talking on a cell phone while driving is more distracting than talking with a passenger. Drivers were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The 40 drivers in the cell phone group talked on a cell phone while driving in a simulator. The 40 drivers in the passenger group talked with a passenger in the car while driving in the simulator. The drivers were instructed to exit the highway when they came to a rest stop. Of the drivers talking to a passenger, 21 noticed the rest stop and exited. For the drivers talking on a cell phone, 11 noticed the rest stop and exited. a. Use the given information to construct and interpret a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the difference in the proportions of drivers who would exit at the rest stop. b. Does the interval from Part (a) support the conclusion that drivers using a cell phone are more likely to miss the exit than drivers talking with a passenger? Explain how you used the confidence interval to answer this question.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Based on the \(95\%\) confidence interval \( (0.05, 0.45) \), drivers talking to a passenger are between \(5\%\) and \(45\%\) more likely to notice the rest stop. In this regard, it also supports the conclusion that drivers using a cell phone are more likely to miss the exit than drivers talking with a passenger.

Step by step solution

01

Calculate the proportions

First, we need to calculate the proportions of drivers who noticed the rest stop in each group. The proportion for the passenger group is \(p_{1} = \frac{21}{40}=0.525\). The proportion for the cell phone group is \(p_{2}=\frac{11}{40}=0.275\). The difference between the two proportions is \(p_{1}-p_{2}=0.525-0.275=0.25\).
02

Calculate the standard error

The standard error for the difference between two proportions can be calculated using the formula: \[\sqrt{\frac{p_{1}(1-p_{1})}{n_{1}} + \frac{p_{2}(1-p_{2})}{n_{2}}}\] Substituting the values we have: standard error = \[\sqrt{\frac{0.525(1-0.525)}{40} + \frac{0.275(1-0.275)}{40}}\] After the calculation, the standard error is approximately 0.102.
03

Calculate the confidence interval

A \(95\%\) confidence interval for the difference between two proportions is calculated as \[p_{1}-p_{2} \pm Z_{\alpha/2}\times\text{standard error}\] The value for \(Z_{\alpha/2}\) for a \(95\%\) confidence interval is approximately 1.96. Plugging this into the formula along with the other values, we get: \[0.25 \pm 1.96(0.102)\] This provides a confidence interval of approximately \((0.05, 0.45)\).
04

Interpret the results

The calculated \(95\%\) confidence interval is from \(5\%\) to \(45\%\), indicating that we are \(95\%\) confident that the true difference in proportions (proportion of drivers speaking with a passenger - proportion of drivers speaking on a phone) falls in this interval. That is, drivers talking to passengers are between \(5\%\) and \(45\%\) more likely to notice the rest stop compared to those talking on cell phones.
05

Answer the second question

The interval entirely lies above zero, it supports the conclusion that drivers using a cell phone are more likely to miss the exit than drivers talking with a passenger. The positive difference means that the proportion of passenger group who noticed the stop is higher than on the phone group, therefore those on phones are more likely to miss the stop.

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.

Proportion Comparisons
When comparing two groups in a statistical study, proportions serve as a powerful tool to understand the relative frequencies of an event occurring in each group. In the context of the simulated driving experiments, where one group talked on a cell phone and the other with a passenger while driving, proportion comparisons allow us to measure the impact of these two different conditions on driver behavior. Specifically, we calculate the proportion of drivers who noticed the rest stop in each scenario, which is simply the number of drivers who exited the simulator divided by the total number of drivers in that group. By comparing these proportions, we can begin to deduce the relative level of distraction caused by each type of conversation.
Standard Error Calculation
To understand the precision of our proportion comparisons, we calculate the standard error of the difference between two proportions. This is crucial as it reflects the amount of sampling variability and gives us an idea of how much the proportion difference we observed might fluctuate if we were to repeat the experiment. The standard error in this context is calculated using a specific formula that incorporates the proportions of each group along with their respective sample sizes. It quantifies the potential variance between the observed difference and the real, but typically unknown, difference in the population.
Interpretation of Confidence Intervals
Confidence intervals are a cornerstone of inferential statistics, used to estimate the range in which a population parameter is believed to reside, based on sample data. For our driving simulation study, we interpreted a 95% confidence interval for the difference in the proportions of drivers who noticed the rest stop. This interval tells us that, if we were to repeat the experiment many times, 95% of the calculated intervals would contain the true difference in proportions. It is a measure of the reliability of an estimate. In the driving study, the fact that the confidence interval does not include zero strengthens our belief in a real difference between the two groups.
Simulated Driving Experiments
Simulated driving experiments are a powerful method for studying behavior in a controlled environment that mimics real-world driving conditions. This type of experiment helps us gain insights into driver performance and response under various scenarios, such as conversing with a passenger or on a cell phone. The advantage of simulations is that they can be conducted without the risk associated with real-life driving experiments, while still providing valuable data that can be analyzed using statistical methods to draw meaningful conclusions about driver behavior.
Statistical Significance
Determining statistical significance is fundamental in assessing whether the observed difference between groups is due to a genuine effect or merely random chance. In the driving simulator study, we look at whether the proportion of drivers who missed the exit while talking on a cell phone is significantly higher than those conversing with a passenger. Statistical significance is often tested using a pre-determined significance level (commonly 0.05) and comparing it with a p-value or examining confidence intervals. If the confidence interval for the difference in proportions does not contain zero (as in our study), we infer that there is significant evidence to suggest a real difference exists, implying that the observed effect is unlikely to be due to chance.

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 paper "The Effect of Multitasking on the Grade Performance of Business Students" (Research in Higher Education Journal [2010]: 1-10) describes an experiment in which 62 undergraduate business students were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups. Students in one group were asked to listen to a lecture but were told that they were permitted to use cell phones to send text messages during the lecture. Students in the second group listened to the same lecture but were not permitted to send text messages during the lecture. Afterwards, students in both groups took a quiz on material covered in the lecture. The researchers reported that the mean quiz score for students in the texting group was significantly lower than the mean quiz score for students in the no-texting group. In the context of this experiment, explain what it means to say that the texting group mean was significantly lower than the no-text group mean. (Hint: See discussion on page 578 )

The article "Why We Fall for This" (AARP Magazine, May/June 2011 ) describes an experiment investigating the effect of money on emotions. In this experiment, students at University of Minnesota were randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group counted a stack of dollar bills. The other group counted a stack of blank pieces of paper. After counting, each student placed a finger in very hot water and then reported a discomfort level. It was reported that the mean discomfort level was significantly lower for the group that had counted money. In the context of this experiment, explain what it means to say that the money group mean was significantly lower than the blank- paper group mean.

In the paper "Happiness for Sale: Do Experiential Purchases Make Consumers Happier than Material Purchases?" (Journal of Consumer Research [2009]: \(188-197\) ), the authors distinguish between spending money on experiences (such as travel) and spending money on material possessions (such as a car). In an experiment to determine if the type of purchase affects how happy people are after the purchase has been made, 185 college students were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The students in the "experiential" group were asked to recall a time when they spent about \(\$ 300\) on an experience. They rated this purchase on three different happiness scales that were then combined into an overall measure of happiness. The students assigned to the "material" group recalled a time that they spent about \(\$ 300\) on an object and rated this purchase in the same manner. The mean happiness score was 5.75 for the experiential group and 5.27 for the material group. Standard deviations and sample sizes were not given in the paper, but for purposes of this exercise, suppose that they were as follows: \begin{tabular}{|ll|} \hline Experiential & Material \\ \hline\(n_{1}=92\) & \(n_{2}=93\) \\ \(s_{1}=1.2\) & \(s_{2}=1.5\) \\ \hline \end{tabular} Using the following Minitab output, carry out a hypothesis test to determine if these data support the authors' conclusion that, on average, "experiential purchases induced more reported happiness." Use \(\alpha=0.05\) Two-Sample T-Test and Cl Sample \(\begin{array}{rrrrr}\text { ple } & \text { N } & \text { Mean } & \text { StDev } & \text { SE Mean } \\ 1 & 92 & 5.75 & 1.20 & 0.13 \\ 2 & 93 & 5.27 & 1.50 & 0.16\end{array}\) Difference \(=\operatorname{mu}(1)-\operatorname{mu}(2)\) Estimate for difference: 0.480000 \(95 \%\) lower bound for difference: 0.149917 T-Test of difference \(=0(\mathrm{vs}>): \mathrm{T}\) -Value \(=2.40 \mathrm{P}\) -Value \(=\) \(0.009 \mathrm{DF}=175\)

The article "An Alternative Vote: Applying Science to the Teaching of Science" (The Economist, May 12,2011 ) describes an experiment conducted at the University of British Columbia. A total of 850 engineering students enrolled in a physics course participated in the experiment. Students were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups. Both groups attended the same lectures for the first 11 weeks of the semester. In the twelfth week, one of the groups was switched to a style of teaching where students were expected to do reading assignments prior to class, and then class time was used to focus on problem solving, discussion, and group work. The second group continued with the traditional lecture approach. At the end of the twelfth week, students were given a test over the course material from that week. The mean test score for students in the new teaching method group was \(74,\) and the mean test score for students in the traditional lecture group was \(41 .\) Suppose that the two groups each consisted of 425 students. Also suppose that the standard deviations of test scores for the new teaching method group and the traditional lecture method group were 20 and 24 , respectively. Estimate the difference in mean test score for the two teaching methods using a \(95 \%\) confidence interval. Be sure to give an interpretation of the interval.

The paper "Short-Term Sleep Loss Decreases Physical Activity Under Free-Living Conditions but Does Not Increase Food Intake Under Time-Deprived Laboratory Conditions in Healthy Men" (American Journal of Clinical Nutrition [2009]: \(1476-1483\) ) describes an experiment in which 30 male volunteers were assigned at random to one of two sleep conditions. Men in the 4 -hour group slept 4 hours per night for two nights. Men in the 8-hour group slept 8 hours per night for two nights. On the day following these two nights, the men recorded food intake. The researchers reported that there was no significant difference in mean calorie intake for the two groups. In the context of this experiment, explain what it means to say that there is no significant difference in the group means. (Hint: See discussion on page 578 )

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.