MATH E-306 - Topic 18: More Inference Considerations

Homework Solutions
You may (and should) use Fathom for all activities where calculations are required.
Hand in the solutions to the Homework Activities shown below:
Activity 18-7, 18-8, 18-9, 18-10, 18-15, 18-18, 18-20, 18-21
Activity 18-7: Charitable Contributions
a.

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Interval estimate for population proportion of Category in
AttributeNam e
In the sample 1052 out of 1334 , or 0.788606, are Category .
Based on the sample, the 90.0 % confidence interval for the population
proportion of Category in AttributeNam e is from 0.7702 to 0.807.

Fathom found the 90% CI (.7702, .807).

b.

From Summary Statistics

Estimate Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Interval estimate for population proportion of Category in
AttributeName
In the sample 1052 out of 1334 , or 0.788606, are Category .
Based on the sample, the 99.0 % confidence interval for the population
proportion of Category in AttributeNam e is from 0.7598 to 0.8174.

Fathom found the 99% CI (.7598, .8174).

c. Yes, the sample proportion does differ from .75 at the .01 significance level because .
75 is not in the 99% confidence interval. Thus, you would reject the null hypothesis
H0: = .75 vs. the two-sided alternative Ha: .75, and would decide that .75 is not a
plausible value for .
d. No, the sample proportion does not differ from .80 at the = .10 significance
level because .80 is in the 90% confidence interval. Thus, you would not reject the
null hypothesis H0: = .80 vs. the two-sided alternative Ha: .80. With 90%
confidence, .80 seems to be a plausible value for .

Activity 18-8: Female Senators

a.

From Summary Statistics

Test Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Attribute: AttributeNam e
16 out of 100 , or 0.16, are Category
Alternative hypothesis: The population proportion for Category is less than
0.5 .
The test statistic, z, is -6.8.
If it w ere true that the population proportion of Category w ere equal to 0.5 (the
null hypothesis), and the sampling process w ere performed repeatedly, the
probability of getting a z value this small or smaller w ould be < 0.0001.

Fathom results:
The test statistic is z = -6.8
b. The p-value is close to 0; it is extremely rare for z to be less than -6.8.
c. No, this significance test has no meaning because you know that women constitute
less than half of the entire 2007 U.S. Senate because you have taken a census of the
population of interest. You know women make up exactly 16% of the 2007 Senate.
Activity 18-9: Distinguishing Between Colas
a. The null hypothesis is that the subject is just guessing and would correctly
identify the different brand of soda 1/3 of the time in the long run. In symbols,
the null hypothesis is H0: = .3333.
The alternative hypothesis is that the subject would correctly identify the different
brand of soda more than 1/3 of the time in the long run. In symbols, the
alternative hypothesis is Ha: > .3333.
b. You cant tell whether Randys sample data would necessarily lead to rejecting the
null hypothesis because you dont know how many times he ran the experiment. If he
only tried twice and succeeded 50% of the time, this would not be convincing evidence
that he is doing better than guessing, but if he tried 500 times and succeeded 50% of
the time, this would be very convincing evidence.

c.

From Summary Statistics

Test Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Attribute: AttributeNam e
23 out of 50 , or 0.46, are Category
Alternative hypothesis: The population proportion for Category is greater
than 0.333 .
The test statistic, z, is 1.905.
If it w ere true that the population proportion of Category w ere equal to 0.333
(the null hypothesis), and the sampling process w ere performed repeatedly, the
probability of getting a z value this great or greater w ould be 0.028.

Fathom found the value z=1.905; the probability of getting a value of z at least this large
if the null hypothesis is true is .02. So, at the .05 significance level, reject H 0 and
conclude that Randy is doing better than guessing.
d. Assuming Randys success rate is 50%, the CLT says P( p > .46) = .7142 with
samples of size 50.
So, you expect about 71% of random
samples to yield a sample proportion
greater than .46 if Randys success rate
is 50% (therefore more than a 50/50
chance for Randy to do so).

e. The probability will increase because with the larger sample size the standard
deviation will decrease from .0707 to .05. (In the formula for z, the sample size, n, is in
the denominator of the denominator, so increasing n will increase z.)
f. The probability will increase because the standard deviation will decrease to .06665
and (more importantly) because .46 will be so much further below 2/3 than it is below
1/2. If the population proportion is even further above .46, the probability of obtaining a
sample proportion of .46 or more quickly increases.

Activity 18-10: Voter Turnout

a. From Summary Statistics

Estimate Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Interval estimate for population proportion of Category in
AttributeName
In the sample 1783 out of 2613 , or 0.682357, are Category .
Based on the sample, the 99.9 % confidence interval for the
population proportion of Category in AttributeName is from
0.6524 to 0.7123.

Fathom found the 99.9% CI, (.6524, .7123).

b. No, his was a self-reported answer about whether people voted. Those surveyed
may have lied to the interviewer or have forgotten whether they voted. It is unlikely that
this confidence interval is reliable.
c. No, 49% is not within the confidence interval reported in part a.
d. Yes, you are 99.9% confident that this confidence interval succeeds in capturing the
proportion of all adult Americans who would claim to have voted in 1996. This would be
a very different proportion from those who actually did vote.
e. You do not need to conduct the significance test because .49 is not contained in the
99.9% confidence interval. You know that you would reject H 0: = .49 vs. Ha: .49 at
the .1% level of significance.

Activity 18-15: Penny Activities

a. A 95% CI for flips: (.5012, .5127)

From Summary Statistics

Estimate Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Interval estimate for population proportion of Category in
AttributeName
In the sample 14709 out of 29015 , or 0.506945, are Category .
Based on the sample, the 95.0 % confidence interval for the
population proportion of Category in AttributeName is from
0.5012 to 0.5127.

A 95% CI for spins: (.4435, .4572)

From Summary Statistics

Estimate Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Interval estimate for population proportion of Category in
AttributeName
In the sample 9197 out of 20422 , or 0.450348, are Category .
Based on the sample, the 95.0 % confidence interval for the
population proportion of Category in AttributeName is from
0.4435 to 0.4572.

A 95% CI for tilts: (.6829, .6979)

From Summary Statistics

Estimate Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Interval estimate for population proportion of Category in
AttributeName
In the sample 10087 out of 14611 , or 0.69037, are Category .
Based on the sample, the 95.0 % confidence interval for the
population proportion of Category in AttributeName is from
0.6829 to 0.6979.

b. These intervals are so narrow because the sample sizes are so large (which makes
the margins-of-error very small).
c. You would reject H0: = .5 vs. Ha: .5 at the .05 significance level for all three
situations (flips, spins, and tilts) because .5 is not contained in any of the 95%
confidence intervals.

d. H0: = .5
Ha: .5

From Summary Statistics

Test Proportion

Attribute (categorical): unassigned

Flipped pennies:

Attribute: AttributeNam e
14709 out of 29015 , or 0.506945, are Category
Alternative hypothesis: The population proportion for Category is not
equal to 0.5 .

z = 2.366
p-value = .018

The test statistic, z, is 2.366.

Since p < .05, reject H0

If it w ere true that the population proportion of Category w ere equal to 0.5
(the null hypothesis), and the sampling process w ere performed repeatedly,
the probability of getting a z value w ith an absolute value this great or
greater w ould be 0.018.
Note: This probability w as computed using the normal approxim ation.

The statistical evidence suggests that the probability of obtaining a head with a flipped
penny differs significantly from .5 (at the .05 level of significance).
For spins,
z = -14.19
p-value < 0.0001

Attribute: AttributeNam e
9197 out of 20422 , or 0.450348, are Category
Alternative hypothesis: The population proportion for Category is not
equal to 0.5 .
The test statistic, z, is -14.19.

Since p < .05, reject H0

If it w ere true that the population proportion of Category w ere equal to 0.5
(the null
hypothesis),
and the
process
ere performed
The statistical evidence suggests that
the
probability
ofsampling
obtaining
a whead
with arepeatedly,
spun
the probability of getting a z value w ith an absolute value this great or
penny differs significantly from .5 (at
the
.05
level
of
significance).
greater w ould be < 0.0001.
For tilts,
z = 46.02
p-value < 0.0001
Since p < .05, reject H0

Attribute:
Note: ThisAttributeNam
probability w ase computed using the normal approxim ation.
10087 out of 14611 , or 0.69037, are Category
Alternative hypothesis: The population proportion for Category is not
equal to 0.5 .
The test statistic, z, is 46.02.
If it w ere true that the population proportion of Category w ere equal to 0.5
(the null hypothesis), and the sampling process w ere performed repeatedly,
the probability of getting a z value w ith an absolute value this great or
greater w ould be < 0.0001.
Note: This probability w as computed using the normal approxim ation.

The statistical evidence suggests that the probability of obtaining a head with a spun
penny differs significantly from .5 (at the .05 level of significance).
e. No; although you are confident that the probability of obtaining a head with a flipped
penny is not .50, the probability is quite close to .50. The confidence interval tells you
this probability is somewhere between .5012 and .5127, which for all practical purposes
is .50.

Activity 18-18: Flat Tires

a. H0: = .25
Ha: > .25
b. A Type I error would be concluding that more that one-fourth of the students will
choose the right-front tire when, in fact, the proportion is not more than one-fourth.
A Type II error would be failing to realize that more than one-fourth of the students
will choose the right-front tire when asked the flat tire question.
c. Answers will vary. Here is one representative running of the applet:
The simulation indicates that you are virtually certain to recognize that the right front tire
is being chosen more than one-fourth of the time. The approximate power is 100%.

d. If the sample size were increased from 100 to 200 and all else remained the same,
the power of the test would increase. Of course, in this case, it is impossible for the
power to increase beyond 100%.

e. If the significance level were increased from .05 to .10 and all else remained the
same, the power of the test would increase. Of course, in this particular case, the power
cannot increase because it is already 100%.

f. If the right-front tire were actually chosen 40% of the time instead of 50% of the time,
and all else remained the same, the power of the test would decrease. This result is
verified by the simulation, which shows that the power of the test decreased to about
93.5% in this case.

p
Activity 18-20: Veterans Marital Problems
a. Let represent the population proportion of all Vietnam veterans who are divorced.
H0: = .27 (The percentage of all Vietnam veterans who are divorced is 27%.)
Ha: > .27 (The percentage of all Vietnam veterans who are divorced is more than 27%.)
b. A Type I error would be deciding that the Vietnam veteran divorce rate is more than
27% when it is actually no more than 27%.
c. A Type II error would be failing to realize that the Vietnam veteran divorce rate is
more than 27%.
Activity 18-21: Hiring Discrimination
A Type I error would be deciding that there is discrimination (concluding that not
enough African Americans are hired by the Hazelwood School District) when,
in fact, there is no discrimination.
A Type II error would be failing to realize that the Hazelwood School District was
discriminating (not hiring enough African Americans).
In this case, which type of error is more serious is a personal opinion
(false accusations vs. allowing discrimination to continue).