/*! 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 45 The article "Cost-Effectiveness ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

The article "Cost-Effectiveness in Public Education" (Chance [1995]: \(38-41\) ) reported that for a regression of \(y=\) average SAT score on \(x=\) expenditure per pupil, based on data from \(n=44\) New Jersey school districts, \(a=766, b=0.015, r^{2}=.160\), and \(s_{e}=53.7\). a. One observation in the sample was (9900, 893). What average SAT score would you predict for this district, and what is the corresponding residual? b. Interpret the value of \(s_{e}\). c. How effectively do you think the least-squares line summarizes the relationship between \(x\) and \(y ?\) Explain your reasoning.

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. A predicted SAT score of 914.5 and a residual of -21.5. b. The standard error of 53.7 represents the average difference between the observed and predicted SAT scores. c. The least-squares line doesn't provide a good summary of the relationship as only 16% of the variability in SAT scores is explained by changes in expenditure per pupil.

Step by step solution

01

Compute Predicted SAT Score

To predict the SAT score for expenditure per pupil of 9900, we use the given regression line equation \(y = a + bx\). Substituting \(a=766, b=0.015, x=9900\) gives: \(y = 766 + 0.015 * 9900 = 914.5\)
02

Compute the Residual

The residual is the difference between the observed value and predicted value of y. That is: \(Residual = y_{observed} - y_{predicted}\). With given observed value of 893, residual = 893 - 914.5 = -21.5.
03

Interpret the SE

The standard error \(s_{e} = 53.7\) tells the average distance that the observed values fall from the regression line. It can be interpreted as the typical amount that the SAT score will differ from the actual score for a given expenditure per pupil.
04

Evaluate Regression Line Fit

The coefficient of determination \(r^{2}=0.160\) means that 16% of the variation in SAT scores can be explained by changes in expenditure per pupil. This isn't a particularly strong fit as roughly 84% of the variability in the SAT scores isn't explained by the model. Hence, the least-squares line doesn't summarize the relationship very well.

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.

SAT Scores
The SAT is a standardized test used widely for college admissions in the United States. It serves as a common measure to evaluate students' readiness for college. The test evaluates skills in areas such as mathematics, reading, and writing. In educational research, SAT scores can be used to assess various relationships, such as the impact of school expenditures on student performance.

In regression analysis, like the example given, the goal is often to examine how changes in one variable (such as expenditure per pupil) affect another (like SAT scores). The regression line allows us to predict SAT scores based on different levels of other variables. With specific data points and a derived equation, it's possible to predict what an average SAT score might be given a particular input of expenditure.

In the original problem, this process involves substituting known values into the regression equation to forecast potential outcomes. In this case, a predicted SAT score gives a central value around which the actual results might vary.
Standard Error
The standard error is a statistical term that measures the accuracy with which a sample represents a population. In the context of regression, the standard error (\(s_{e}\)) of the estimate provides insight into the average distance that the actual data points fall from the regression line. In simpler terms, it tells us how far off on average the predicted values (derived from the regression model) are from the observed values.

If the standard error is small, it indicates that the data points are close to the regression line, reflecting a more accurate predictive model. Conversely, a larger standard error suggests a less precise model. In the example provided, the standard error of \(53.7\) means that SAT scores tend to deviate from the predicted score by an average of approximately 54 points.

This level of error helps to judge the reliability of the predictions made by the regression line. It gives students and educators a way to quantify the expected unpredictability of the results.
Coefficient of Determination
The coefficient of determination, represented by \(r^{2}\), is a key metric in assessing the effectiveness of a regression model. It indicates the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable (in this case, SAT scores) that is predictable from the independent variable (here, expenditure per pupil).

An \(r^{2}\) value of 0.160, as seen in the original exercise, suggests that only 16% of the variance in SAT scores is explained by the regression model. This indicates a weak relationship between the expenditure per pupil and SAT scores, as 84% of the variation is due to other unexplained factors.

A higher \(r^{2}\) value would imply a stronger relationship, showing that changes in expenditure more significantly affect SAT scores. Understanding \(r^{2}\) allows educators to gauge the impact of changes in different factors on student performance, helping to guide decision-making in educational policy and practice.

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 relationship between the depth of flooding and the amount of flood damage was examined in the paper "Significance of Location in Computing Flood Damage" \((\) Journal of Water 91Ó°ÊÓ Planning and Management [1985]: 65-81). The following data on \(x=\) depth of flooding (feet above first-floor level) and \(y=\) flood damage (as a percentage of structure value) were obtained using a sample of flood insurance claims: $$ \begin{array}{rrrrrrrr} x & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 \\ y & 10 & 14 & 26 & 28 & 29 & 41 & 43 \\ x & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 & 13 & \\ y & 44 & 45 & 46 & 47 & 48 & 49 & \end{array} $$ a. Obtain the equation of the least-squares line. b. Construct a scatterplot, and draw the least-squares line on the plot. Does it look as though a straight line provides an adequate description of the relationship between \(y\) and \(x\) ? Explain. c. Predict flood damage for a structure subjected to \(6.5 \mathrm{ft}\) of flooding. d. Would you use the least-squares line to predict flood damage when depth of flooding is \(18 \mathrm{ft}\) ? Explain.

The data given in Example \(5.5\) on \(x=\) call-to-shock time (in minutes) and \(y=\) survival rate (percent) were used to compute the equation of the least- squares line, which was $$ \hat{y}=101.36-9.30 x $$ The newspaper article "FDA OKs Use of Home Defibrillators" (San Luis Obispo Tribune, November 13,2002 ) reported that "every minute spent waiting for paramedics to arrive with a defibrillator lowers the chance of survival by 10 percent." Is this statement consistent with the given least-squares line? Explain.

The paper cited in Exercise \(5.69\) gave a scatterplot in which \(x\) values were for anterior teeth. Consider the following representative subset of the data: $$ \begin{aligned} &\begin{array}{lllrrl} x & 15 & 19 & 31 & 39 & 41 \\ y & 23 & 52 & 65 & 55 & 32 \\ x & 44 & 47 & 48 & 55 & 65 \\ y & 60 & 78 & 59 & 61 & 60 \\ \sum x=404 & \sum x y=18,448 & \sum y=545 & \end{array}\\\ &\begin{array}{rl} \sum x=404 & \sum x y=18,448 \quad \sum y=545 \\ a=32.080888 & b=0.554929 \end{array} \end{aligned} $$ a. Calculate the predicted values and residuals. b. Use the results of Part (a) to obtain SSResid and \(r^{2}\). c. Does the least-squares line appear to give accurate predictions? Explain your reasoning.

Draw two scatterplots, one for which \(r=1\) and a second for which \(r=-1\).

The accompanying data on \(x=\) head circumference \(z\) score (a comparison score with peers of the same age - a positive score suggests a larger size than for peers) at age 6 to 14 months and \(y=\) volume of cerebral grey matter (in ml) at age 2 to 5 years were read from a graph in the article described in the chapter introduction (Journal of the American Medical Association [2003]). $$ \begin{array}{cc} & \text { Head Circumfer- } \\ \text { Cerebral Grey } & \text { ence } z \text { Scores at } \\ \text { Matter (ml) 2-5 yr } & \text { 6-14 Months } \\ \hline 680 & -.75 \\ 690 & 1.2 \\ 700 & -.3 \\ 720 & .25 \\ 740 & .3 \\ 740 & 1.5 \\ 750 & 1.1 \\ 750 & 2.0 \\ 760 & 1.1 \\ 780 & 1.1 \\ 790 & 2.0 \\ 810 & 2.1 \\ 815 & 2.8 \\ 820 & 2.2 \\ 825 & .9 \\ 835 & 2.35 \\ 840 & 2.3 \\ 845 & 2.2 \\ \hline \end{array} $$ a. Construct a scatterplot for these data. b. What is the value of the correlation coefficient? c. Find the equation of the least-squares line. d. Predict the volume of cerebral grey matter for a child whose head circumference \(z\) score at age 12 months was \(1.8\). e. Explain why it would not be a good idea to use the least-squares line to predict the volume of grey matter for a child whose head circumference \(z\) score was \(3.0\).

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.