/*! 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 87 ADHD and Pesticides In Exercise ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 4: Problem 87

ADHD and Pesticides In Exercise 4.16 on page \(232,\) we describe an observational study investigating a possible relationship between exposure to organophosphate pesticides as measured in urinary metabolites (DAP) and diagnosis of ADHD (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder). In reporting the results of this study, the authors \({ }^{25}\) make the following statements: "The threshold for statistical significance was set at \(P<.05 . "\) "The odds of meeting the ... criteria for ADHD increased with the urinary concentrations of total DAP metabolites." \- "The association was statistically significant." (a) What can we conclude about the p-value obtained in analyzing the data? (b) Based on these statements, can we distinguish whether the evidence of association is very strong vs moderately strong? Why or why not? (c) Can we conclude that exposure to pesticides is related to the likelihood of an ADHD diagnosis? (d) Can we conclude that exposure to pesticides causes more cases of ADHD? Why or why not?

Short Answer

Expert verified
The study has found a statistically significant relationship (p<0.05) between organophosphate pesticides exposure and ADHD diagnosis. However, the strength of this association isn't clear. A correlation between the variables is established but causality cannot be deduced from this study.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding P-values

A p-value indicates if the results of a study are statistically significant. In this case 'The threshold for statistical significance was set at \(P<.05 .\) This indicates that the results of this study were statistically significant with a p-value less than 0.05. It means that there's less than a 5% probability that the observed results weren't due to chance alone.
02

Understanding Evidence Strength

This provided information doesn't allow us to determine how strong the evidence of an association is. With just a single threshold (P<.05 ), we only know whether a statistical significance was found or not. More information, such as the precise p-value, would be needed to determine whether the evidence is very strong versus moderately strong.
03

Interpreting Relationship

Given the observation that 'The odds of meeting the 鈥� criteria for ADHD increased with the urinary concentrations of total DAP metabolites' and the established statistical significance, we can conclude that there is a relationship between exposure to organophosphate pesticides and ADHD diagnosis.
04

Causation Vs. Correlation

The last question asks us to consider whether we can conclude that exposure to pesticides is the cause of ADHD cases. Even though there's a correlation, this study doesn't establish causation. Causation could be confirmed if it was an experimental study with controlled conditions and random assignments. So, based on this study, we cannot conclude that exposure to pesticides causes cases of ADHD.

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.

Understanding P-values
A p-value is a fundamental concept in statistics. It helps us decide if the results of a study are statistically significant. In simple terms, the p-value measures how likely it is for the observed data to have occurred by random chance alone.
When researchers claim that their study results are significant, they usually refer to a p-value threshold, often set at 0.05. This threshold determines whether a finding is worth considering further.
In the context of the ADHD and pesticides study, a p-value less than 0.05 means:
  • There is less than a 5% chance that the observed relationship between pesticide exposure and ADHD occurred by random chance.
  • This makes the findings statistically significant, suggesting some potential association.
However, a small p-value does not tell us everything about the strength or meaning of the evidence. For that, additional data points or results are necessary to differentiate if the evidence is strong or just marginal.
Observational Study
An observational study is a research method where researchers observe subjects in their natural environment without intervention. In the case of the study on ADHD and pesticide exposure, researchers measured urinary metabolites to assess the possible link to ADHD without altering the participants' environment.
Observational studies are a critical tool in scientific research and provide valuable insights. However, they have limitations:
  • They can show relationships between variables but not cause-and-effect.
  • Other factors, known as confounders, might influence the outcomes.
Therefore, while the study found a relationship between pesticide exposure and ADHD diagnosis, this doesn't mean one causes the other. For causal conclusions, researchers would need to conduct a controlled experiment.
Correlation vs Causation
The distinction between correlation and causation is essential in interpreting research findings. Correlation refers to a statistical relationship between two variables, where changes in one variable are related to changes in another.
However, correlation does not imply causation, which means that just because two variables are related, one does not necessarily cause the other to occur.
In the context of the ADHD and pesticide study:
  • An observed correlation exists between higher pesticide levels and increased likelihood of an ADHD diagnosis.
  • However, without evidence from controlled experiments, we can't claim that the pesticides are causing ADHD.
Sometimes, other unseen factors, such as genetics or environmental influences, might actually be responsible for the observed relationship. Consequently, it's important to be cautious in drawing conclusions from correlation without further experimental evidence.

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

Desipramine vs Placebo in Cocaine Addiction In this exercise, we see that it is possible to use counts instead of proportions in testing a categorical variable. Data 4.7 describes an experiment to investigate the effectiveness of the two drugs desipramine and lithium in the treatment of cocaine addiction. The results of the study are summarized in Table 4.9 on page \(267 .\) The comparison of lithium to the placebo is the subject of Example \(4.29 .\) In this exercise, we test the success of desipramine against a placebo using a different statistic than that used in Example \(4.29 .\) Let \(p_{d}\) and \(p_{c}\) be the proportion of patients who relapse in the desipramine group and the control group, respectively. We are testing whether desipramine has a lower relapse rate than a placebo. (a) What are the null and alternative hypotheses? (b) From Table 4.9 we see that 20 of the 24 placebo patients relapsed, while 10 of the 24 desipramine patients relapsed. The observed difference in relapses for our sample is $$ \begin{aligned} D &=\text { desipramine relapses }-\text { placebo relapses } \\ &=10-20=-10 \end{aligned} $$ If we use this difference in number of relapses as our sample statistic, where will the randomization distribution be centered? Why? (c) If the null hypothesis is true (and desipramine has no effect beyond a placebo), we imagine that the 48 patients have the same relapse behavior regardless of which group they are in. We create the randomization distribution by simulating lots of random assignments of patients to the two groups and computing the difference in number of desipramine minus placebo relapses for each assignment. Describe how you could use index cards to create one simulated sample. How many cards do you need? What will you put on them? What will you do with them?

Exercises 4.117 to 4.122 give null and alternative hypotheses for a population proportion, as well as sample results. Use StatKey or other technology to generate a randomization distribution and calculate a p-value. StatKey tip: Use "Test for a Single Proportion" and then "Edit Data" to enter the sample information. Hypotheses: \(H_{0}: p=0.5\) vs \(H_{a}: p \neq 0.5\) Sample data: \(\hat{p}=28 / 40=0.70\) with \(n=40\)

Influencing Voters Exercise 4.38 on page 235 describes a possible study to see if there is evidence that a recorded phone call is more effective than a mailed flyer in getting voters to support a certain candidate. The study assumes a significance level of \(\alpha=0.05\) (a) What is the conclusion in the context of this study if the p-value for the test is \(0.027 ?\) (b) In the conclusion in part (a), which type of error are we possibly making: Type I or Type II? Describe what that type of error means in this situation. (c) What is the conclusion if the p-value for the test is \(0.18 ?\) (d) In the conclusion in part (c), which type of error are we possibly making: Type I or Type II? Describe what that type of error means in this situation.

In Exercises 4.112 to \(4.116,\) the null and alternative hypotheses for a test are given as well as some information about the actual sample(s) and the statistic that is computed for each randomization sample. Indicate where the randomization distribution will be centered. In addition, indicate whether the test is a left-tail test, a right-tail test, or a twotailed test. Hypotheses: \(H_{0}: p_{1}=p_{2}\) vs \(H_{a}: p_{1}>p_{2}\) Sample: \(\hat{p}_{1}=0.3, n_{1}=20\) and \(\hat{p}_{2}=0.167, n_{2}=12\) Randomization statistic \(=\hat{p}_{1}-\hat{p}_{2}\)

Flaxseed and Omega-3 Studies have shown that omega-3 fatty acids have a wide variety of health benefits. Omega- 3 oils can be found in foods such as fish, walnuts, and flaxseed. A company selling milled flaxseed advertises that one tablespoon of the product contains, on average, at least \(3800 \mathrm{mg}\) of ALNA, the primary omega-3. (a) The company plans to conduct a test to ensure that there is sufficient evidence that its claim is correct. To be safe, the company wants to make sure that evidence shows the average is higher than \(3800 \mathrm{mg}\). What are the null and alternative hypotheses? (b) Suppose, instead, that a consumer organization plans to conduct a test to see if there is evidence against the claim that the product contains an average of \(3800 \mathrm{mg}\) per tablespoon. The consumer organization will only take action if it finds evidence that the claim made by the company is false and the actual average amount of omega- 3 is less than \(3800 \mathrm{mg}\). What are the null and alternative hypotheses?
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

Logic and Functions

Read Explanation

Applied Mathematics

Read Explanation

Geometry

Read Explanation

Decision Maths

Read Explanation

Theoretical and Mathematical Physics

Read Explanation

Mechanics Maths

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.