NICAVERA, Jarell Carven L.

Statistics Analysis with Software Application

BSA 2-4 Mr. J. P. Echevarria

Activity 1
1. Dependent
2. Dependent
3. Independent
4. Independent
5. Independent

Activity 2
1. Problem

a. State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis: There is no significant difference in mean calcium intake in patients with normal bone density as
compared to patients with osteopenia and osteoporosis.
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant difference in mean calcium intake in patients with normal bone density as
compared to patients with osteopenia and osteoporosis.

b. Set the Level of Significance or Alpha Level (α)

α = 0.05

c. Determine Test Distribution to Use

Dependent Variable: Calcium intake

Independent Variable: Bone Densities of Normal, Osteopenia, and Osteoporosis
Test Distribution to Use: One-Way ANOVA
Using p-value approach: If p - value ≤ α reject Ho, otherwise failed to reject Ho
Ho: Equal Variances Assumed Ha: Equal Variances Not Assumed

F-Test Two-Sample for F-Test Two-Sample for

Variances Variances
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Normal Normal
  Bone  
Osteopenia Osteopenia Osteoporosis
  Bone Osteoporosis
Mean Mean
938.3333333 800 800
Mean 716.5
938.3333333 715
Variance Variance
26016.66667 48000 48000
Variance 88649.5
26016.66667 89950
Observations Observations
6 6 6
Observations 6 6 6
df df 5 5 df 5 5 5 5
F 0.542013889 0.54145821
F 0.28923476
P(F<=f) one-tail F
0.258864847 5
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.099780503
0.25851939
F Critical one-tail 0.1980069
P(F<=f) one-tail F Critical
3 one-tail 0.1980069  
F Critical one-tail 0.1980069  
Failed to Reject Failed to reject Ho
Ho Equal Variances Assumed
Failed to reject Ho
Equal Variances Assumed
Equal Variances
Assumed
d. Calculate Test Statistics or p-value
 Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
Normal Bone 6 5630 938.3333333 26016.66667
Osteopenia 6 4800 800 48000
Osteoporosis 6 4290 715 89950

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 152477.7778 2 76238.88889 1.394897337 0.27822902 3.68232034
Within Groups 819833.3333 15 54655.55556

Total 972311.1111 17        

e. Make Statistical Decision

p-value = 0.27822902; failed to reject Ho

f. Draw Conclusion

Bone
Indicator Mean f-value p-value Decision Remarks
Density
Normal 938.33 No
Failed to Reject
Calcium Intake Osteopenia 800 1.394897337 0.27822902 Significant
Ho
Osteoporosis 715 Difference
Conclusion:
There is enough evidence to support that the mean calcium intake in patients with normal bone density as compared to
patients with osteopenia and osteoporosis are different.

2. Problem

a. State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis: On average, men actually do not spend significantly more than women on Valentine’s Day.
Alternative Hypothesis: On average, men actually do spend significantly more than women on Valentine’s Day.

b. Set the Level of Significance or Alpha Level (α)

α = 0.01

c. Determine Test Distribution to Use

Dependent Variable: Spending on Valentine’s Day

Independent Variable: Men and Women (sex)
Test Distribution to Use: Independent t-test
Using p-value approach: If p - value ≤ α reject Ho, otherwise failed to reject Ho
Ho: Equal Variances Assumed Ha: Equal Variances Not Assumed
 F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

  Men (in $) Women (in $)

Mean 110.9066667 75.481
Variance 829.85955 930.6784544
Observations 9 10
df 8 9
F 0.891671604
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.441123383
F Critical one-tail 0.169187022  

Failed to Reject Ho
Equal Variances Assumed

d. Calculate Test Statistics or P-value

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances

  Men (in $) Women (in $)

Mean 110.9066667 75.481
Variance 829.85955 930.6784544
Observations 9 10
Pooled Variance 883.2342641
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 17
t Stat 2.594325902
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.009450253
t Critical one-tail 2.566933984
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.018900507
t Critical two-tail 2.89823052  

e. Make Statistical Decision

p-value = 0.009450253; Reject Ho

f. Draw Conclusion

Decisio Remark
Indicator Treatment Mean t-value p-value
n s
Spending on Valentine's Men 110.9066667 2.59432 Reject More
0.00945
Day Women 75.481 6 Ho than

Conclusion:
There is enough evidence that, on average, men actually do spend significantly more than women on Valentine’s Day.

3. Problem

a. State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis: There is no significant increase in the teaching performance of teachers after attending the training
course.
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant increase in the teaching performance of teachers after attending the
training course.

b. Set the Level of Significance or Alpha Level (α)

α = 0.10

c. Determine Test Distribution to Use

Dependent Variable: Teaching Performance
Independent Variable: Training Course (Before and After)
Test Distribution to Use: Dependent t-test
Using p-value approach: If p - value ≤ α reject Ho, otherwise failed to reject Ho
Ho: Equal Variances Assumed Ha: Equal Variances Not Assumed

d. Calculate Test Statistic or P-value

t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means

  Before After
Mean 85.25 94.1
Variance 8.092105263 13.14736842
Observations 20 20
Pearson Correlation 0.2219655
Hypothesized Mean
Difference 0
df 19
t Stat -9.696475625
P(T<=t) one-tail 4.3134E-09
t Critical one-tail 1.327728209
P(T<=t) two-tail 8.6268E-09
t Critical two-tail 1.729132812  

e. Make Statistical Decision

p-value = 4.3134E-09; Reject Ho

f. Draw Conclusion

Decisio
Indicator Treatment Mean t-value p-value Remarks
n
Before 85.25 Reject Significan
Teaching Performance -9.6964756 < 0.0000
After 94.1 Ho t

Conclusion:
There is enough evidence to support that teaching performance of teachers increases after attending training courses.

4. Problem
 a. State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis: There is no significant relationship between a child’s height and head circumference.
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant relationship between a child’s height and head circumference.

b. Set the Level of Significance or Alpha Level (α)

α = 0.05

c. Determine Test Distribution to Use

Dependent Variable: Head Circumference

Independent Variable: Child’s Height
Test Distribution to Use: Pearson r
d. Calculate Test Statistic or P-value

Pearson r 0.911072733
t-value 6.630071669
p-value 9.59039E-05
e. Make Statistical Decision

Pearson r = 0.911072733; Strong and Direct Correlation

p-value = 9.59039E-05; Reject Ho

f. Draw Conclusion

Head Circumference (in inches)

Height Pearson r t-value p-value Decision Remarks
(in inches) 0.911072733 6.630071669 < 0.0000 Reject Ho Significant
Conclusion:
There is enough evidence to support that there is a significant relationship between a child’s height and head
circumference.

5. Problem

a. State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis: Smoking status is dependent with the level of education.

Alternative Hypothesis: Smoking status is independent with the level of education.

b. Set the Level of Significance or Alpha Level (α)

α = 0.05

c. Determine Test Distribution to Use

Two Categorical Variables:
Smoking Status (Current, Former, Never)
Number of Years in Education
 Test Distribution to Use: Chi-Square Distribution: Test for Independence

d. Calculate Test Statistic or P-value

ACTUAL/ OBSERVED

  Smoking Status
Grand
No. of Years of Total
Education Current Former Never
Less than 12 178 88 208 474
12 137 69 143 349
13-15 44 25 44 113
16 or more 34 33 51 118
Grand Total 393 215 446 1054

EXPECTED

  Current Former Never

Less than 12 176.7381404 96.68880455 200.573055
12 130.129981 71.19070209 147.6793169
13-15 42.13377609 23.05028463 47.81593928
16 or more 43.99810247 24.07020873 49.9316888

p-value 0.252895516

e. Make Statistical Decision

p-value = 0.252895516; Failed to Reject Ho

f. Draw Conclusion

No. of Years of Smoking Status

Total
Education Current Former Never
Less than 12 178 88 208 474
12 137 69 143 349
13-15 44 25 44 113
16 or more 34 33 51 118
Total 393 215 446 1054
p-value: 0.252895516
Decision Failed to Reject Ho
Remarks: Not Significant
 Conclusion:
There is enough evidence to support that smoking status is dependent with the level of education.

6. Problem

a. State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis: There is no significant relationship between a child’s height and head circumference.
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant relationship between a child’s height and head circumference.

b. Set the Level of Significance or Alpha Level (α)

α = 0.05

c. Determine Test Distribution to Use

Dependent Variable: Head Circumference

Independent Variable: Child’s Height
Test Distribution to Use: Pearson r
d. Calculate Test Statistic or P-value

Pearson r 0.911072733
t-value 6.630071669
p-value 9.59039E-05
e. Make Statistical Decision

Pearson r = 0.911072733; Strong and Direct Correlation

p-value = 9.59039E-05; Reject Ho

f. Draw Conclusion

Head Circumference (in inches)

Height Pearson r t-value p-value Decision Remarks
(in inches) 0.911072733 6.630071669 < 0.0000 Reject Ho Significant
Conclusion:
There is enough evidence to support that there is a significant relationship between a child’s height and head
circumference.