FLORENCE-DARLINGTON TECHINICAL COLLEGE

Easy To Get, Slow To Lose:

Man vs. Fast Food
Math 120: Take Home Project
Chandra Mingo

Abstract
The consumption of fast food has been noted as a leading cause of weight gain. Therefore, it is
hypothesized that fast food availability is a risk factor for obesity. This has been studied by
calculating the correlation between the number of fast food restaurants available to each state and
the percentage of obesity to each state. Using a linear regression model, it showed the correlation
between each variable and determined if it was a good fit or not. The availability of fast food per
state was slightly associated with the percentage of obesity. Overall, this analysis established that
fast food availability is less of a leading risk factor of obesity in the United States.

Materials and Methods

The purpose of this experiment is to prove whether or not the number of fast food restaurants per
state has an impact on the percentage of obesity per state. The materials used for this project
includes statistical data collected from StatCrunch and other online sources. The information is
then graphed by the StatCrunch generator; used to create a linear regression model. In order to
create the liner regression model there were specific steps that had to be followed. First, all data
is compile in an Excel spreadsheet. This includes the name of each state in alphabetical order, the
number of fast-food restaurants in each state, and the percentage of obesity in each state. Second,
copy each column into StatCrunch. Make sure to list the name of each state first then the rest of
the data subsequently. Third, once all the data is copied into StatCrunch, click STAT then select
regression; simple linear. Fourth, select the number of fast food restaurants as the X variable and
the percentage of obesity as the Y variable. Fifth, compare the data found, interpret the slope,
determine if the correlation is a good fit and record your results.

Results
The results shows the linear regression table and graph. The table shows the X variable as the
percentage of obesity and the Y variable as the number of fast food locations.
The table also shows that R is not close to one and could really affect the fit of the graph. The
slope is also very small which means it will really affect the percentage of increase of obesity.
Consequently, the graph is a visual representation of the table and shows that there is not a good
fit. The blue dots are clustered together and do not fit closely to the fitted line. The correlation
between X and Y is seen as cluttered.
Simple linear regression results:
Dependent Variable: % Obesity
Independent Variable: Fast Food Map Locations
% Obesity = 26.804148 + 0.00036660718 Fast Food Map Locations
Sample size: 51
R (correlation coefficient) = 0.12328441
R-sq = 0.015199047
Estimate of error standard deviation: 3.2178682
Parameter estimates:
Parameter
Intercept
Slope

Estimate
Std. Err.
Alternative DF
T-Stat
P-Value
26.804148
0.61538327
0 49 43.556836 <0.0001
0.00036660718 0.00042156931
0 49 0.86962493 0.3887

Analysis of variance table for regression model:

Source
DF
SS
MS
Model
Error
Total

1
49
50

7.8306978
507.37911
515.2098

7.8306978
10.354676

F-stat
0.75624752

P-value
0.3887

The blue dots represent the 52 states of the United States.

Discussion
The purpose of the experiment was to see if there was a correlation between fast food availability
and obesity. The studies found that there was no significant increase in the percentage of obesity
based on the availability of fast food. More specifically the slope which was 0.00036660718
represented the availability of fast food restaurants. For every unit increase in fast food locations
there is a 0.00036660718 unit increase in obesity. This shows that there is very little increase in
the percentage of obesity based on the availability of fast food restaurants. Therefore, this does
not support my idea. Consequently, the R- Squared equals 0.015199047, which means 1.52%
variation in the percentage of obesity is explained by the availability of fast food restaurants.
Also, r is equal to 0.12328441 which means it is not close to one and represents a negative
correlation. The experiment had a few shortcomings and could have been more accurate or
really show the impact of food availability to obesity. This could have been done by choosing the

top ten obese states, their fast food availability and calculating the linear regression. In addition,
we could have looked at what specific fast food restaurants are available to these top 10 states
and how they impact the percentage of obesity. Of course, since many restaurants such as
McDonalds, Burger king, and many more have been linked to obesity; we could see how many
are in each state and how that effects the impact of obesity. It could probably be hypothesized
that the increase number of restaurants such as McDonalds and Burger King contributes to the
increase in obesity. In conclusion, my idea that the increase in food availability has a significant
impact on the percentage of obesity, was proven wrong. This experiment leads me to other
questions like are there other variables or factors that may have a greater impact on the
percentage of obesity. If I conducted this experiment again I would include the percentage of
poverty and compare its results to the results of the availability of fast food restaurants to see
which one has a greater impact on the percentage of obesity.