/*! 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 40 One month before the election, a... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

One month before the election, a poll of 630 randomly selected voters showed \(54 \%\) planning to vote for a certain candidate. A week later, it became known that he had had an extramarital affair, and a new poll showed only \(51 \%\) of 1010 voters supporting him. Do these results indicate a decrease in voter support for his candidacy? a. Test an appropriate hypothesis and state your conclusion. b. If you concluded there was a difference, estimate that difference with a confidence interval and interpret your interval in context.

Short Answer

Expert verified
The conclusion depends on the result of the hypothesis test (P-value) and the Confidence interval, which were not calculated in the description. However, the result from the hypothesis test will indicate if there is a significant decrease in voter support, and the confidence interval will estimate the size of this decrease.

Step by step solution

01

Formulate the Hypotheses

The first step in hypothesis testing is to formulate the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is that the candidate's support hasn't significantly decreased (Proportion before = Proportion after). The alternative hypothesis is that the candidate's support has decreased (Proportion before > Proportion after). In mathematical form: \(H_0: p1 = p2; H1: p1 > p2\).
02

Conduct the Hypothesis Test

Now, you calculate the pooled sample proportion (\(p\)) and the standard error. Using these, you compute the z-score for the difference in proportions. The z-score tells you how many standard deviations away from the mean our data point is. If the Z score is large (in magnitude), it supports the alternative Hypothesis as it indicates a significant difference.
03

Find the P-value and Comparing with the Significance Level

Find the P-value corresponding to the observed z-score. This P-value is the probability that you would see a difference as large as the observed one, if the null hypothesis was true. If the p-value is less than the significance level (often chosen as 0.05), we reject the null hypothesis.
04

Estimating the Difference Using Confidence Interval

If the hypothesis test in steps 2 and 3 indicates a significant difference, we will calculate a confidence interval for this difference. The Confidence Interval gives an estimated range of values which is likely to include the true unknown difference, using our calculated point estimate and adding/subtracting the margin of error.
05

Interpret the Results

Finally, interpret the results of the hypothesis test and confidence interval in context. If the null hypothesis was rejected, it implies there was a statistically significant decrease in support for the candidate. The confidence interval gives an estimated range of this decrease.

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.

Confidence Interval
A confidence interval is a range of values used to estimate the true value of a population parameter. This interval is calculated from a given set of sample data and represents what we expect the population parameter to be, with a certain level of confidence. In the context of the election poll, if we find a significant change in voter support, a confidence interval can tell us the range in which the true change in voter support likely falls. For example, a 95% confidence interval for the difference in voter support before and after the event would estimate where the actual difference in population proportions lies, with a 5% chance the true difference is not within the interval.

When interpreting the interval, it's important to consider the level of confidence chosen. A 95% confidence interval is standard, but this can be adjusted depending on how certain you want to be about the range. The wider the interval, the more uncertainty it contains, but also a higher confidence in including the actual parameter value.
P-value
The p-value is a critical component in hypothesis testing. It represents the probability of obtaining a result at least as extreme as the observed one, given that the null hypothesis is true. Think of it as a tool to measure the strength of evidence against the null hypothesis. In our example, a low p-value indicates that the observed decrease in voter support is unlikely to be due to random chance alone and might be a real effect. If the p-value is below our significance threshold (commonly 0.05), this is taken as strong evidence against the null hypothesis, leading us to consider the alternative hypothesis that there is indeed a decrease in voter support.
Z-score
The z-score in hypothesis testing reveals how many standard deviations an element is from the mean. When comparing two proportions, as with the voter support before and after the event, the z-score helps us determine how significantly different the two proportions are. A high absolute value of the z-score indicates that the difference between the sample statistic and the null hypothesis is substantial, whereas a low absolute value suggests the difference is due to random variation. In statistical testing, we often compare the z-score against a critical value to decide whether to reject the null hypothesis.
Null Hypothesis
The null hypothesis (\( H_0 \)) is a statement of no effect or no difference that serves as the starting assumption for statistical testing. It's the hypothesis that researchers aim to test against the alternative. In our poll example, the null hypothesis posits that the proportion of voters supporting the candidate has not changed significantly after the scandal — that is, any observed change is simply due to random fluctuation present in sample data rather than a real effect.
Alternative Hypothesis
In contrast to the null, the alternative hypothesis (\( H_1 \text{ or } H_a \)) proposes that there is a true effect or difference. It's the hypothesis we want to provide evidence for through our testing. In the election scenario, the alternative hypothesis claims that the proportion of voters supporting the candidate has indeed decreased following the affair. This hypothesis is considered only if we find sufficient evidence against the null hypothesis.
Statistical Significance
Statistical significance is a determination about whether any observed effects in the data are likely to be due to something other than just random chance. This decision is often made by looking at the p-value and comparing it to a pre-determined significance level or alpha (\( \alpha \text{, typically set at 0.05 or 5%} \)). If the p-value is less than alpha, then the results are considered statistically significant. This implies that the data provides enough evidence to suggest a real effect or difference, such as a significant decrease in voter support following a scandal.
Proportion Comparison
Proportion comparison is a statistical method used to evaluate whether there is a significant difference between the proportions from two populations. When we compare the voter support in the polls before and after the event, we are essentially comparing two proportions to assess if the difference observed is statistically significant or not. This involves calculating a test statistic and a p-value to help decide if there's evidence that the proportions are different in a meaningful way. Proportion comparison is crucial in polls, surveys, and experiments where the metric of interest is a percentage or a ratio.

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 data below show the sugar content (as a percentage of weight) of several national brands of children’s and adults’ cereals. Create and interpret a 95% confidence interval for the difference in mean sugar content. Be sure to check the necessary assumptions and conditions Children's cereals: 40.3, 55, 45.7, 43.3, 50.3, 45.9, 53.5, 43,44.2,44,47.4,44,33.6,55.1,48.8,50.4,37.8,60.3,46.6 Adults' cereals: \(20,30.2,2.2,7.5,4.4,22.2,16.6,14.5,\) \(21.4,3.3,6.6,7.8,10.6,16.2,14.5,4.1,15.8,4.1,2.4,3.5,\) 8.5,10,1,4.4,1.3,8.1,4.7,18.4

In the July 2007 issue, Consumer Reports examined the calorie content of two kinds of hot dogs: meat (usually a mixture of pork, turkey, and chicken) and all beef. The researchers purchased samples of several different brands. The meat hot dogs averaged 111.7 calories, compared to 135.4 for the beef hot dogs. A test of the null hypothesis that there's no difference in mean calorie content yields a P-value of 0.124 . Would a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for \(\mu_{M e a t}-\mu_{B e e f}\) include \(0 ?\) Explain.

A Vermont study published by the American Academy of Pediatrics examined parental influence on teenagers' decisions to smoke. A group of students who had never smoked were questioned about their parents' attitudes toward smoking. These students were questioned again two years later to see if they had started smoking. The researchers found that, among the 284 students who indicated that their parents disapproved of kids smoking, 54 had become established smokers. Among the 41 students who initially said their parents were lenient about smoking, 11 became smokers. Do these data provide strong evidence that parental attitude influences teenagers' decisions about smoking? a. What kind of design did the researchers use? b. Write appropriate hypotheses. c. Are the assumptions and conditions necessary for inference satisfied? d. Test the hypothesis and state your conclusion. e. Explain in this context what your P-value means. \(\mathrm{f}\). If it is later found that parental attitudes actually do influence teens' decisions to smoke, which type of

Researchers comparing the effectiveness of two pain medications randomly selected a group of patients who had been complaining of a certain kind of joint pain. They randomly divided these people into two groups, then administered the pain killers. Of the 112 people in the group who received medication A, 84 said this pain reliever was effective. Of the 108 people in the other group, 66 reported that pain reliever B was effective. a. Write a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the percent of people who may get relief from this kind of joint pain by using medication A. Interpret your interval. b. Write a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the percent of people who may get relief by using medication B. Interpret your interval. c. Do the intervals for \(A\) and B overlap? What do you think this means about the comparative effectiveness of these medications? d. Find a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the difference in the proportions of people who may find these medications effective. Interpret your interval. e. Does this interval contain zero? What does that mean? f. Why do the results in parts \(c\) and e seem contradictory? If we want to compare the effectiveness of these two pain relievers, which is the correct approach? Why?

In Exercise 53 , we saw a \(90 \%\) confidence interval of (-6.5,-1.4) grams for \(\mu_{\text {Meat }}-\mu_{\text {Beef }}\) the difference in mean fat content for meat vs. all-beef hot dogs. Explain why you think each of the following statements is true or false: a. If I eat a meat hot dog instead of a beef dog, there's a \(90 \%\) chance I'll consume less fat. b. \(90 \%\) of meat hot dogs have between 1.4 and 6.5 grams less fat than a beef hot dog. c. I'm \(90 \%\) confident that meat hot dogs average between 1.4 and 6.5 grams less fat than the beef hot dogs. d. If I were to get more samples of both kinds of hot dogs, \(90 \%\) of the time the meat hot dogs would average between 1.4 and 6.5 grams less fat than the beef hot dogs. e. If I tested more samples, l'd expect about \(90 \%\) of the resulting confidence intervals to include the true difference in mean fat content between the two kinds of hot dogs.

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.