MYLab3

Jason Qin, Joshua Dharma Prameswara, Nursaule Sagyndykova, Carien Leushuis

12 August 2016

Authcates: jqin17, jdpra2, nsag3, cleu0001

Question 1
yawn_expt <- data.frame(group=c(rep("treatment", 34), rep("control", 16)),
yawn=c(rep("yes", 10), rep("no", 24), rep("yes", 4), rep("no", 12)))

library(dplyr)

##
## Attaching package: 'dplyr'

## The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':

##
## filter, lag

## The following objects are masked from 'package:base':

##
## intersect, setdiff, setequal, union

library(tidyr)
library(knitr)
yawn_expt %>%
group_by(group, yawn) %>%
tally() %>%
ungroup() %>%
spread(yawn, n, fill=0) %>%
mutate(total = rowSums(.[-1])) %>%
mutate(proportion=yes/total) %>%
kable()

group no yes total proportion

control 12 4 16 0.2500000
treatment 24 10 34 0.2941176
a. 50

b. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups. 16 people were assigned to
the control group where there wasn't a person yawning near them and 34 people were
assigned to the treatment group where a person near them yawned.

c. The two variables are: i) which group they belong to (control or treatment) and ii) the
outcome depending on whether they yawned or not (yes or no).
d. 25% of the control group yawned and roughly 29.41% of the treatment group yawned.

e. There is roughly a 4.41 percentage point difference in the proportion of people

yawning between the two groups.

Question 2
a. The null hypothesis is the hypothesis that the proportion of people yawning in the
control group and the treatment group is the same.

b. The alternative hypothesis would be the hypothesis that the proportion of people
yawning in the treatment group is greater than the proportion of people yawning in
the control group i.e. : < .

c. This is because Mythbusters is testing whether "a person can be subconsciously

influenced into yawning if another person near them yawns". Hence they expect that a
person is more likely to yawn if someone near them also yawns.

Question 3
yawn_expt <- data.frame(group=c(rep("treatment", 34), rep("control", 16)),
yawn=c(rep("yes", 10), rep("no", 24), rep("yes", 4), rep("no", 12)))

yawn_expt %>%
group_by(group, yawn) %>%
tally() %>%
ungroup() %>%
spread(yawn, n, fill=0) %>%
mutate(total = rowSums(.[-1])) %>%
mutate(p=yes/total)->yawn.table
expt.diff<-yawn.table$p[2]-yawn.table$p[1]

set.seed(2)
permutation <-function(data){
data%>%
mutate(yawn=sample(yawn)) %>%
group_by(group, yawn) %>%
tally() %>%
ungroup() %>%
spread(yawn, n, fill=0) %>%
mutate(total = rowSums(.[-1])) %>%
mutate(p=yes/total)->yawn.table
expt.diff<-yawn.table$p[2]-yawn.table$p[1]
return(expt.diff)
}
permutation(yawn_expt) #difference between proportions of treatment and contr
ol groups

## [1] 0.1360294
Question 4
prop.difference<-vector(length=10000)
set.seed(2)
for (i in 1:10000) {
prop.difference[i] <- permutation(yawn_expt)
}

library(ggplot2)
prop.diff<-data.frame(prop.difference)
ggplot(data=prop.diff)+geom_histogram(aes(x=prop.difference), binwidth=0.025)
+geom_vline(xintercept=expt.diff,colour="red")+labs(x="Permutation test diffe
rences")

sum(prop.difference>expt.diff)

## [1] 2549

sum(prop.difference>expt.diff)/length(prop.difference)

## [1] 0.2549

above=filter(prop.diff,prop.difference>expt.diff)
ggplot()+geom_histogram(data=prop.diff, aes(x=prop.difference),binwidth=0.025
)+geom_histogram(data=above,aes(x=prop.difference), fill="red",binwidth=0.025
)+geom_vline(xintercept=expt.diff,colour="red")
The results indicate that 25.49% of the time, the permuted data yields a difference larger
than the difference of the actual data.

Question 5
a. p-value = 0.2549

b. Fail to reject the null hypothesis.

c. We conclude that there is insufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis that the
proportion of people yawning in the control group is the same as the proportion of
people yawning in the treatment group.

d. Therefore based on our experimental results, there is evidence to suggest that

yawning isn't contagious.