MACT-317

Chapter 10
Practice Problems 13

Assigned problems from the sixth edition

Pages 473 to 476 Problems 10.7, 10.9, 10.11, 10.13, 10.15, 10.16, 10.17,
10.18.
Page 482 Problems 10.35, 10.37.
Pages 485 and 486 Problems 10.41, 10.42.
Pages 495 and 496 Problems 10.50, 10.51, 10.52, 10.57, 10.58.

Assigned problems from the seventh edition

Pages 504 to 506 Problems 10.19, 10.21, 10.23, 10.26.
Page 512 Problem 10.47.
Page 516 Problem 10.51.
Pages 526 to 528 Problems 10.62, 10.63(a,b), 10.64(a,c), 10.69(a,c,d),
10.70.

In the solutions below, the first number refers to edition 6 and the second
refers to edition 7

Solutions

10.7 (This problem is not in the seventh edition)

(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 :   900 versus the alternative
H A :   900 .
(2)   0.05
Y  0
(3) The test statistic used is Z  and the rejection region is given as
 n

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

 n  35, Y  885, S  50,  0  900
885  900
Z   1.77
50 35
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  1.96 or Z  1.96 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here Z  1.77 , hence we do not reject. H 0 :   900 Thus, at the   0.05 level
of significance, the evidence does not support the mail-order PC buyers’ claim.

(19.19) 10.9
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 :   130 versus the alternative
H A :   130 .
(2)   0.05
Y  0
(3) The test statistic used is Z  and the rejection region is given as
 n

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

n  40, Y  128.6, S  2.1,  0  130
128.6  130
Z   4.22
2.1 40
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  1.65 otherwise do not reject H 0 .
Here Z  4.22 , hence we reject H 0 :   130 Thus, at the   0.05 level of
significance, there is sufficient evidence to claim that the average output voltage is
less than 130.

10.11 (10.21)
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : 1   2 versus the alternative
H A : 1   2 .
(2)   0.01
Y  Y 
Z 1 2
(3) The test statistic used is S12 S 22 and the rejection region is given as

n1 n2
 (4) Calculate Z from sample data.
Z
1.65  1.43  3.65
(0.26) 2 (0.22) 2

30 35
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  2.58 or Z  2.58 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here Z  3.65 hence we reject H 0 : 1   2 . Thus, at the   0.01 level of
significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that the soils do appear to differ
with respect to the average shear strength.

10.13 (10.23)
a) Let 1 and  2 denote the means of the distances from the release point in the two
selected areas. Since we have no prior knowledge as to which of the two means
should be larger than the other, we shall test the null H 0 : 1   2 versus the
alternative H A : 1   2 .
b) The alternative hypothesis implies a two-tailed test where we reject H 0 : 1   2 if the
sample findings show a significant difference between the two means regardless of
which one is larger.
c)
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : 1   2 versus the alternative
H A : 1   2 .
(2)   0.01
Y  Y 
Z 1 2
(3) The test statistic used is S12 S 22 and the rejection region is given as

n1 n2
 (4) Calculate Z from sample data.
Z
 2980  3205  0.954
(1140 ) 2 (963) 2

40 40
(5) Reject 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  2.58 or Z  2.58 otherwise do not
H
reject H 0 .
Here Z  0.954 hence we do not reject H 0 : 1   2 . Thus, at the   0.01
level of significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that there is no
significant difference between the means of the two locations.

10.15 (This problem is not in the seventh edition)

(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : p  0.5 versus the alternative
H A : p  0 .5 .
(2)   0.01
pˆ  p0
Z
(3) The test statistic used is p0 1  p0  and the rejection region is given as
n

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

n  1429, p
ˆ  0.6, p 0  0.5
0.6  0.5
Z   7.56
0.51  0.5
1429
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  2.33 otherwise do not reject H 0 .
 Here Z  7.56 hence we reject H 0 : p  0.5 . Thus, at the   0.01 level of
significance, the evidence supports that the majority of voters are unable to name
an official whom they admire.

10.16 (10.26)
1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : p  0.45 versus the alternative
H A : p  0.45 .
2)   0.01
pˆ  p0
Z
3) The test statistic used is p0 1  p0  and the rejection region is given as
n

4) Calculate Z from sample data.

32
n  80, Y  32, pˆ   0.4, p 0  0.45
80
0.4  0.45
Z   0.899
0.451  0.45
80
5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  2.58 or Z  2.58 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here Z  0.899 hence we do not reject H 0 : p  0.45 . Thus, at the   0.01 level
of significance, the evidence is insufficient to indicate that the proportion of brown-
eyed people in the region where the study was performed differs from 0.45.

10.17 (This problem is not in the seventh edition)

(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : p1  p 2 versus the alternative

H A : p1  p 2 .

(2)  0.01
 pˆ 1  pˆ 2 
Z ~
(3) The test statistic used is p 1  ~ p  ~p 1  ~p  and the rejection region is

n1 n2
given as
 (4) Calculate Z from sample data.

pˆ 1  0.5, pˆ 2  0.71, ~p

1225  0.5  1232  0.71  0.605
1225  1232
Z 
 0.5  0.71  10.65
0.6051  0.605 0.6051  0.605

1225 1232
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  2.58 or Z  2.58 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here Z  10.65 hence we reject H 0 : p1  p 2 . Thus, at the   0.01 level of
significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that there is a significant
difference in the proportions for the years 1991 and 1992.

10.18 (This problem is not in the seventh edition)

a)
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : p1  p 2 versus the alternative
H A : p1  p 2 .
(2)   0.05
 pˆ 1  pˆ 2 
Z ~
(3) The test statistic used is p 1  ~ p  ~p 1  ~p  and the rejection region is

n1 n2
given as

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

 pˆ 1  0.45, pˆ 2  0.34, ~p
1000  0.45  1000  0.34  0.395
1000  1000
Z 
 0.45  0.34  5.03
0.3951  0.395 0.3951  0.395

1000 1000
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  1.96 or Z  1.96 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here Z  5.03 hence we reject H 0 : p1  p 2 . Thus, at the   0.05 level of
significance, the evidence supports that there is a significant difference in the
proportion of aspirin users between 1986 and 1991.
b)
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : p1  p 2 versus the alternative
H A : p1  p 2 .
(2)   0.05
 pˆ 1  pˆ 2 
Z ~
(3) The test statistic used is p 1  ~ p  ~p 1  ~p  and the rejection region is

n1 n2
given as

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

ˆ1
p  0.14, p
ˆ2  0.26, ~
p 
1000  0.14  1000  0.26 

1000  1000
Z 
 0.14  0.26   6.71
0.21  0.2  0.21  0.2 

1000 1000
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  1.65 otherwise do not reject H 0 .
Here Z  6.71 hence we reject H 0 : p1  p 2 . Thus, at the   0.05 level of
significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that Ibuprofen has significantly
increased its market share between 1986 and 1991.
c) The two tests are related since the survey is based on the same 2 samples (each of size
1000) for the years 1986 and 1991. In part (a) we reached the conclusion that the two
proportions are different, in part (b) we reached a more specific conclusion which is that
Ibuprofen has significantly increased its market share between 1986 and 1991.

10.35 (This problem is not in the seventh edition)

 Refer to Ex.10.7. A 99% C.I. for the true average savings is given by:
 s   50 
y  Z 0.005   885  2.58   (863.195,906.805).
 n  35 
Since the value  0  900 is included in the interval, we do not reject H 0 :   900 , at the
99% confidence level (i.e.   0.01 level of significance). This is consistent with the
conclusion we reached using the hypothesis testing procedure.

10.37 (10.47)
Refer to Ex.10.15. To find a 99% lower confidence bound (denote this lower bound by a)
for the proportion of voters who are unable to name an official whom they admire
P( p  a)  0.99
P Z  2.33  0.99
 
 
pˆ  p
P  2.33  0.99
 pˆ (1  pˆ ) 
 
 n 
 pˆ (1  pˆ ) 
P pˆ  p  2.33   0.99

 n 
 pˆ (1  pˆ )  pˆ (1  pˆ )
P p  pˆ  2.33   0.99
  a  pˆ  2.33  a  0.57
 n  n

Since 0  p  1 , A 99% lower-bounded confidence interval for p is given by: [0.57, 1].
The interval does not contain 0.5, hence we reject H 0 : p  0.5 in favor of H A : p  0.5
at the 99% confidence level. This result is consistent with that of Ex.10.15.

10.41 (10.51)
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : 1   2 versus the alternative
H A : 1   2 .
(2)   0.05
Y  Y 
Z 1 2
(3) The test statistic used is S12 S 22 and the rejection region is given as

n1 n2

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

Z
 74  71  1.58
(9) 2 10
2

50 50
 (5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  1.96 or Z  1.96 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here Z  1.58 hence we do not reject H 0 : 1   2 . Thus, at the   0.05 level
of significance, the evidence is insufficient to conclude that there is a significant
difference between the means of the two sets of school children.

Now to find the p-value (the attained significance level)

From the standard normal tables we find p  0.1142 . This is the lowest  -value at
which we can reject the null. Any significance level < 0.1142 will not allow us to reject
the null hypothesis (that's why we did not reject it at   0.05 ).

10.42(This problem is not in the seventh edition)

a) Let p1 be the proportion of couples who used the safety seats 4 to 6 weeks after the
birth of their children among those who attended the lecture and p 2 be the
corresponding proportion among those who did not attend.
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : p1  p 2 versus the alternative
H A : p1  p 2 .
(2)   0.05
 pˆ 1  pˆ 2 
Z ~
(3) The test statistic used is p 1  ~ p  ~p 1  ~p  and the rejection region is

n1 n2
given as

(4) Calculate Z from sample data.

 ˆ1
p  0.96, ˆ 2
p  0.78, ~
p 
 78  0.96    58  0.78 

78  58
Z 
 0.96  0.78 
 3.23
0.883(1  0.883) 0.8831  0.883

78 58
(5) Reject H 0 if Z lies in the RR that is Z  1.65 otherwise do not reject H 0 .
Here Z  3.23 hence we reject H 0 : p1  p 2 . Thus, at the   0.05 level of
significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that the lecture was effective.
b) Now to find the p-value

From the standard normal tables we find p  0.00135 . This is the lowest  -value at
which we can reject the null H 0 : p1  p 2 .
10.50 (10.62)
A Student’s t test can be used to test a hypothesis involving the population mean if :
(1) The sample is small;
(2) The sample is selected from a normal population;
(3) The population variance  2 is unknown.

10.51 (10.63 a, b)
We have a small sample (n = 5). In order to be able to use the Student’s t test, we will
assume that the sample is selected from a normal population with unknown variance.
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 :   800 versus the alternative
H A :   800 .
(2)   0.05
Y  0
(3) The test statistic used is T  , and the rejection region from the t table
S n
with n  1  4 degrees of freedom is given as
 n

(4) Calculate T from sample data. For the given data, y i

3975 and
y i 1
  795
n 5
5 2
1
s2    yi  y   69.5, s  8.336 .
n  1 i 1
795  800
T   1.341
8.336 5

(5) Reject H 0 if T lies in the RR that is T  2.132 otherwise do not reject H 0 .

Here T  1.341 hence we do not reject H 0 :   800 . Thus, at the   0.05
level of significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that the average yield is
not less than 800, contradicting the claim that something is wrong with the
process.
Now we want to find the p-value.

Here, the t statistic is based on 4 degrees of freedom; Checking the 4 degrees of freedom
row of the t table we find that we will not be able to get the exact value of p but we know
that p is greater than 0.1, since t = -1.553 would yield a p-value of 0.1, thus the observed
value of t = -1.341 which is greater than -1.553 would yield a p-value that is greater than
0.1.

10.52 (10.64 a, c)
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 :   7 versus the alternative
HA :   7.
(2)   0.1
Y  0
(3) The test statistic used is T  . In this example we have n  1  9
S n
t   t 0.05  1.833
degrees of freedom, using the t-table, . The rejection region
2

is then given as
 (4) Calculate T from sample data. For the given data, y  7.1 and s  0.12 .
7 .1  7
T   2.64
0.12 10

(5) Reject H 0 if T lies in the RR that is T  1.833 or T  1.833 otherwise do

not reject H 0 . Here T  2.64 hence we reject H 0 :   7 . Thus, at the   0.1
level of significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that the mean discharge
differs from 7 ounces.

Now we want to find the attained significance level ( i.e. the p-value ) of the test.

By checking the 9 degrees of freedom row of the t table, we find that the p-values
associated with 2.262 and 2.821 are (2(0.025) = 0.05 and 2(0.01) = .02 respectively.
Thus, we will not be able to get the exact value of p but we know that p lies between 0.02
and 0.05.

10.57 (10.69 a, c, d)
We have 2 small samples  n1  11, n2  14 . In order to be able to use the Student’s t
test, we will assume that the samples are independent and are both selected from
normal populations for which the variances  12 and  22 are unknown but assumed
equal.
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : 1   2 versus the alternative
H A : 1   2 .
(2)   0.05
 T
Y
1  Y2 
2
(3) The test statistic used is S p S p2 and the rejection region from the t table

n1 n2
with  n1  n2  2  23 degrees of freedom is given as

(4) Calculate T from sample data.

n1  11 n2  14
y1  64 y 2  69
s12  52 s 22  71
Hence,

s 2p 
10  52  13  71  62.74
11  14  2

T 
 64  69  1.57
62.74 62.74

11 14
(5) Reject H 0 if T lies in the RR that is T  2.069 or T  2.069 otherwise do not
reject H 0 .
Here T  1.57 hence we do not reject H 0 : 1   2 . Thus, at the   0.05 level of
significance, there is insufficient evidence to indicate a difference in the mean scores
for the two populations associated with the two teaching methods.

Now to find the p-value

By checking the 23 degrees of freedom row of the t table, we find that the p-values
associated with 1.319 and 1.714 are (2(0.1) = 0.2 and 2(0.05) = 0.1 respectively. Thus, we
will not be able to get the exact value of p but we know that p lies between 0.1 and 0.2.
10.58 (10.70)
Let 1 denote the mean amount of DDT found in juveniles and  2 denote the mean
amount of DDT found in nestlings.
(1) We are interested in testing the null H 0 : 1   2 versus the alternative
H A : 1   2 .
(2)   0.05
Y  Y 
T 1 2
(3) The test statistic used is S p2 S p2 and the rejection region from the t table with

n1 n2
21 degrees of freedom is given as

(4) Calculate T from sample data.

n1  10 n 2  13
y1  0.041 y 2  0.026
s12   0.017   0.000289 s 22   0.006   0.000036
2 2

Hence,
9 0.017   12 0.006
2 2

s 
2
p  0.00014443
10  13  2

T 
 0.041  0.026  2.97
s 2p s 2p

10 13
(5) Reject H 0 if T lies in the RR that is T  1.721 otherwise do not reject H 0 .
Here T  2.97 hence we reject H 0 : 1   2 . Thus, at the   0.05 level of
significance, the evidence permits us to conclude that the juveniles have a larger mean than
the nestlings.