/*! 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 46 A study described in Food Networ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 1: Problem 46

A study described in Food Network Magazine (January 2012) concluded that people who push a shopping cart at a grocery store are less likely to purchase junk food than those who use a hand-held basket. a. Do you think this study was an observational study or an experiment? b. Is it reasonable to conclude that pushing a shopping cart causes people to be less likely to purchase junk food? Explain why or why not.

Short Answer

Expert verified
This study was an observational study, as no variables were manipulated by researchers. It is not reasonable to conclude that pushing a shopping cart causes people to be less likely to purchase junk food based on this observational study alone, as there might be other confounding factors involved.

Step by step solution

01

Part A: Identifying the Type of Study

To determine whether this study was an observational study or an experiment, let's give a brief definition of each. - Observational Study: A study in which the researcher simply observes and records the behavior of participants without controlling any variables. No intervention is made, and no manipulation of factors is done. - Experiment: A study in which the researcher actively manipulates one or more factors or variables to see the effects on other characteristics. Now, based on the provided information, there's no mention of researchers manipulating any variables or interventions made to the shoppers. Therefore, we can infer that this study was an observational study.
02

Part B: Assessing the Causality

In order to see if it's reasonable to conclude that pushing a shopping cart causes people to be less likely to purchase junk food, we need to determine if there's a causal relationship between using a shopping cart and purchasing less junk food. An important rule in statistics is that "correlation does not imply causation," which means that just because two variables are related doesn't necessarily mean that one caused the other. Since the Food Network Magazine conducted an observational study and not an experiment, they didn't manipulate any variables to see the cause-and-effect relationship. It is possible that there are other factors or variables (called confounding factors) that could affect the purchase of junk food, such as health consciousness, budget constraints, or a store's layout. Moreover, it could be the case that people using shopping carts are shopping for larger families and have a different set of priorities than those using hand-held baskets. So, it is not reasonable to conclude that pushing a shopping cart causes people to be less likely to purchase junk food based on this observational study alone, as there might be other factors involved rather than just the type of shopping container used by the shoppers.

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.

Causality in Statistics
In statistics, causality refers to the relationship between two events where one event is the result of the occurrence of the other event. Essentially, it examines whether a cause-and-effect relationship exists. A cause is anything that directly produces an event, while an effect is the condition that arises from a particular cause.

Understanding causality helps in determining whether changes in one variable directly result in changes in another. This is crucial because assuming causation incorrectly can lead to misguided conclusions and decisions. For example, we might think using a shopping cart causes less junk food to be purchased, but this needs a rigorous check of cause and effect.

To establish causality, researchers typically need controlled experiments where specific variables can be manipulated to observe the effects. This is why experiments are often favored over observational studies when trying to determine causal relationships, as manipulation and control of variables help to rule out other influencing factors.
Correlation versus Causation
The phrase "correlation does not imply causation" is foundational in statistics and scientific research. Correlation indicates a relationship or association between two variables, meaning they tend to change together. However, it doesn't mean one causes the other to happen.

Let's think about pushing a shopping cart and purchasing junk food. We might notice that these two aspects are related. But just because fewer junk foods are bought by people with carts doesn't mean the cart is the cause of this behavior. It could be that people using carts have other reasons affecting their choices, such as shopping for a large family which may prioritize healthier options.

When analysing data, always be cautious about jumping to causal conclusions based on correlations alone. It is crucial to look for alternative explanations or perform further analysis through more controlled experiments.
Confounding Factors
Confounding factors are variables that can influence both the dependent and independent variables, potentially misleading the analysis of the relationship between them. These are factors that, if ignored, can suggest a false association or mask a true relationship.

In the scenario where shopping carts seem to be associated with buying less junk food, numerous confounding factors could be at play:
  • Health consciousness: Individuals using shopping carts may be more health-conscious and thus purchase less junk food overall.
  • Shopping purpose: Those with larger loads may be shopping for families and focusing on staple groceries over snacks.
  • Store environment: The layout or promotions of the store may influence how shoppers use baskets versus carts.

Identifying potential confounding factors is crucial in observational studies. Careful consideration of these factors ensures a more accurate interpretation of data and helps prevent erroneous conclusions about causality.

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 article "Study Points to Benefits of Knee Replacement Surgery Over Therapy Alone" (New York Times, October 21,2015\()\) describes a study to compare two treatments for people with knee pain. In the study, 50 people with arthritis received knee replacement surgery followed by a program of exercise. Another 50 people with arthritis did not have surgery but received the same program of exercise. After 1 year, \(85 \%\) of the people who had surgery and \(68 \%\) of the people who did not have surgery reported pain relief. a. Why is it important to determine if the researchers randomly assigned the subjects to one of the two groups? b. Explain why you think that the researchers might have wanted to include a control group in this study.

The article "Doctor Dogs Diagnose Cancer by Sniffing It Out" (Knight Ridder Newspapers, January 9, 2006) refers to an experiment described in the journal Integrative Cancer Therapies. In this experiment, dogs were trained to distinguish between people with breast and lung cancer and people without cancer by sniffing exhaled breath. Dogs were trained to lie down if they detected cancer in a breath sample. After training, the dogs' ability to detect cancer was tested using breath samples from people whose breath had not been used in training the dogs. The paper states, "The researchers blinded both the dog handlers and the experimental observers to the identity of the breath samples." Explain why this blinding is an important aspect of the design of this experiment.

The article "Bicyclists and Other Cyclists" (Annals of Emergency Medicine [2010]: 426) reported that in 2008 , 716 bicyclists were killed on public roadways in the United States and that the average age of the cyclists killed was 41 years. These figures were based on an analysis of the records of all traffic-related deaths of bicyclists on U.S. public roadways (this information is kept by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). a. Does the group of 716 bicycle fatalities represent a census or a sample of the bicycle fatalities in 2008 ? b. If the population of interest is bicycle traffic fatalities in 2008 , is the given average age of 41 years a statistic or a population characteristic?

For each of the following statements, identify the number that appears in boldface type as the value of either a population characteristic or a statistic: a. A department store reports that \(84 \%\) of all customers who use the store's credit plan pay their bills on time. b. A sample of 100 students at a large university had a mean age of 24.1 years. c. The Department of Motor Vehicles reports that \(22 \%\) of all vehicles registered in a particular state are imports. d. A hospital reports that, based on the 10 most recent cases, the mean length of stay for surgical patients is \(\mathbf{6} . \mathbf{4}\) days. e. A consumer group, after testing 100 batteries of a certain brand, reported an average life of \(\mathbf{6 3}\) hours of use.

1.50 A survey of affluent Americans (those with incomes of $$\$ 75,000\( or more) indicated that \)57 \%$$ would rather have more time than more money (USA TODAY, January 29, 2003). a. What condition on how the data were collected would make it reasonable to generalize this result to the population of affluent Americans? b. Would it be reasonable to generalize this result to the population of \(a l l\) Americans? Explain why or why not.
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

Decision Maths

Read Explanation

Calculus

Read Explanation

Applied Mathematics

Read Explanation

Mechanics Maths

Read Explanation

Logic and Functions

Read Explanation

Statistics

Read Explanation
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.