Q1

Initial Regression Table

Cart Price Cart Notice Coupon Yes

Week Notice? Coupon? Reduction? Sales Yes Dummy Dummy
1 Yes Yes None 36 1 1
2 Yes Yes 1 cent off 38 1 1
3 Yes Yes 2 cents off 40 1 1
4 Yes No None 40 1 0
5 Yes No 1 cent off 42 1 0
6 Yes No 2 cents off 44 1 0
7 No Yes None 12 0 1
8 No Yes 1 cent off 20 0 1
9 No Yes 2 cents off 30 0 1
10 No No None 8 0 0
11 No No 1 cent off 16 0 0
12 No No 2 cents off 33 0 0

Page 1
 Q1

ssion Table

Price Reduction 1 cent off Price Reduction 2 cents off

Dummy Dummy
0 0
1 0
0 1
0 0
1 0
0 1
0 0
1 0
0 1
0 0
1 0
0 1

Page 2
 Q1

Initial Regression
SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.941654194395
R Square 0.886712621821
Adjusted R Square 0.821976977147
Standard Error 5.326260190701 10.65252
Observations 12

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 4 1554.333 388.58333 13.697440201 0.0020
Residual 7 198.5833 28.369048
Total 11 1752.917

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%

Intercept 14.5 3.438086 4.2174626 0.0039 6.37021806487
Cart Notice Yes Dummy 20.16666666667 3.075118 6.5580144 0.0003 12.895168647
Coupon Yes Dummy -1.166666666667 3.075118 -0.3793893 0.7156 -8.4381646863
Price Reduction 1 cent off Dummy 5 3.766235 1.3275859 0.2260 -3.9057299069
Price Reduction 2 cents off Dummy 12.75 3.766235 3.385344 0.0117 3.84427009306

RESIDUAL OUTPUT

Observation Predicted Sales Residuals

12 27.25 5.75
4 34.66666666667 5.333333
9 26.08333333333 3.916667
1 33.5 2.5
5 39.66666666667 2.333333
8 18.33333333333 1.666667
2 38.5 -0.5
7 13.33333333333 -1.333333
6 47.41666666667 -3.416667
11 19.5 -3.5
3 46.25 -6.25
10 14.5 -6.5

Page 3
 Q1

Interpretations for Initial Regression

Our independent variables explain 88.67% of the variance in our

R-squared
dependent variable.

ANOVA states that the model is a good fit, suggesting that at least one of
F-test
our independent variables has a relationship with our dependent variables

There are no outliers in this dataset. The standard error squared yield a
Outliers value of 10.65, therefore any value outside 10.65 and -10.65 is an outlier.
After analyzing residuals, we conclude there are no outliers.

Cart Notice (Yes) and Price Reduction (2 cents off) significantly predicts
Broad Interpretation
our canned tomato sales.

Regression Equation y (Sales) = 14.5 + 20.17(Cart Notice Yes) + 12.75 (Price Reduction 2 cents off)

Upper 95% Compared to when there was no notice on carts, when there was a notice
22.629781935 on carts, canned tomato sales were better by $20.16.
t-Test
27.438164686 Compared to when there was no price reduction, when there was a price
6.104831353 reduction of 2 cents off, canned sales were better by $12.75.
13.905729907
21.655729907

Page 4
 Q1

Price Price
Final Regression Table Cart Reductio Reductio
Price Notice n 1 cent n 2 cents
Cart Reductio Yes off off
Week Notice? Coupon? n? Sales Dummy Dummy Dummy
he variance in our 1 Yes Yes None 36 1 0 0
2 Yes Yes 1 cent off 38 1 1 0
3 Yes Yes 2 cents off 40 1 0 1
ng that at least one of
4 Yes No None 40 1 0 0
ur dependent variables
5 Yes No 1 cent off 42 1 1 0
6 Yes No 2 cents off 44 1 0 1
error squared yield a 7 No Yes None 12 0 0 0
nd -10.65 is an outlier. 8 No Yes 1 cent off 20 0 1 0
are no outliers. 9 No Yes 2 cents off 30 0 0 1
10 No No None 8 0 0 0
) significantly predicts 11 No No 1 cent off 16 0 1 0
12 No No 2 cents off 33 0 0 1

e Reduction 2 cents off)

hen there was a notice

r by $20.16.
hen there was a price
etter by $12.75.

Page 5
 Q1

Final Regression
SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.940416488002
R Square 0.884383170906
Adjusted R Square 0.841026859995
Standard Error 5.033222956847 10.06645
Observations 12

ANOVA
df SS MS F
Regression 3 1550.25 516.75 20.39803
Residual 8 202.6667 25.33333
Total 11 1752.917

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value

Intercept 13.91666666667 2.905933 4.789053 0.0014
Cart Notice Yes Dummy 20.16666666667 2.905933 6.939826 0.0001
Price Reduction 1 cent off Dummy 5 3.559026 1.404879 0.1977
Price Reduction 2 cents off Dummy 12.75 3.559026 3.582441 0.0072

RESIDUAL OUTPUT

Observation Predicted Sales Residuals

12 26.66666666667 6.333333
4 34.08333333333 5.916667
9 26.66666666667 3.333333
5 39.08333333333 2.916667
1 34.08333333333 1.916667
8 18.91666666667 1.083333
2 39.08333333333 -1.083333
7 13.91666666667 -1.916667
6 46.83333333333 -2.833333
11 18.91666666667 -2.916667
10 13.91666666667 -5.916667
3 46.83333333333 -6.833333

Page 6

Significance F
Broad Interpretation
0.0004
Regression Equation
Lower 95% Upper 95%
7.21557400751 20.617759326
13.4655740075 26.867759326
-3.207128867 13.207128867
4.54287113297 20.957128867
Q1
Interpretations for Initial Regression
Our independent variables explain 88.44% of the variance in our
R-squared
dependent variable.
ANOVA states that the model is a good fit, suggesting that at least on
F-test
our independent variables has a relationship with our dependent varia
There are no outliers in this dataset. The standard error squared yiel
Outliers value of 10.07, therefore any value outside 10.07 and -10.07 is an out
After analyzing residuals, we conclude there are no outliers.
Cart Notice (Yes) and Price Reduction (2 cents off) significantly predi
our canned tomato sales.
y (Sales) = 13.92 + 20.17(Cart Notice Yes) + 12.75 (Price Reduction 2 cents
Compared to when there was no notice on carts, when there was a no
on carts, canned tomato sales were better by $20.16.
t-Test
Compared to when there was no price reduction, when there was a pr
reduction of 2 cents off, canned sales were better by $12.75.
Prediction 46.84 <---Equation used (13.92+20.17*(1)+12.75)
Page 7
 Q1

sion

8.44% of the variance in our

riable.

it, suggesting that at least one of

ship with our dependent variables

e standard error squared yield a

de 10.07 and -10.07 is an outlier.
clude there are no outliers.

2 cents off) significantly predicts

ato sales.

+ 12.75 (Price Reduction 2 cents off)

on carts, when there was a notice

were better by $20.16.
eduction, when there was a price
ales were better by $12.75.
13.92+20.17*(1)+12.75)

Page 8
1996 Baseball
Team Runs Singles Doubles Triples HR's BB's SB's
Cleveland 840 952 279 23 207 542 132
Chicago Sox 755 982 252 37 146 576 110
Boston 791 907 286 31 175 560 99
Minnesota 703 974 270 34 120 471 105
California 801 927 252 25 186 564 58
Yankees 749 929 280 34 122 625 50
Seattle 796 899 276 20 182 549 110
Milwaukee 740 910 249 42 128 502 105
Texas 691 895 247 24 138 526 90
Oakland 730 881 228 18 169 565 112
Baltimore 704 838 229 27 173 574 92
Kansas City 629 881 240 35 119 475 120
Toronto 642 867 275 27 140 492 75
Detroit 654 788 228 29 159 551 73
Colorado 785 904 259 43 200 484 125
Housston 747 1012 260 22 109 566 176
San Diego 668 978 231 20 116 447 124
Cincinnati 747 853 277 35 161 519 190
Mets 657 946 218 34 125 446 58
Cubs 693 851 267 39 158 440 105
LA 634 941 191 31 140 468 127
Philadelphia 615 909 263 30 94 497 72
Florida 673 891 214 29 144 517 131
Pittsburgh 629 884 245 27 125 456 84
Montreal 621 861 265 24 118 400 120
San Francisco 652 842 229 33 152 472 138
Atlanta 645 797 210 27 168 520 73
St Louis 563 813 238 24 107 436 79
SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.970627301545
R Square 0.942117358504 The singles, doubles, triples, home runs, bb's and stolen bases
Adjusted R Square 0.925579460934 94.21% of the variance in runs.
Standard Error 18.78542925416 37.5708585083
Observations 28

ANOVA
df SS MS F
Regression 6 120619.689174 20103.28 56.967178235
Residual 21 7410.73939752 352.8924
Total 27 128030.428571

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value

Intercept -396.919977249 70.9510249896 -5.594281 0.0000
Singles 0.518486003018 0.07198378617 7.202817 0.0000
Doubles 0.782929409087 0.1555992752 5.031703 0.0001
Triples 0.779995815108 0.55857029615 1.396415 0.1772
HR's 1.405983976837 0.14346854051 9.799946 0.0000
BB's 0.374996055312 0.07892569618 4.751254 0.0001
SB's 0.16346233822 0.1159785212 1.409419 0.1733

RESIDUAL OUTPUT

Observation Predicted Runs Residuals

13 682.5683532114 -40.5683532114
21 657.7903665918 -23.7903665918
2 777.6435796455 -22.6435796455
22 633.9989302019 -18.9989302019
12 640.1198032225 -11.1198032225
1 848.9194803361 -8.91948033609
11 711.4435138268 -7.44351382679
15 791.2375848981 -6.23758489813
26 657.9414391322 -5.94143913224
24 634.7762763903 -5.7762763903
4 708.500952643 -5.500952643
3 793.6722671603 -2.67226716031
14 654.8818065229 -0.88180652294
23 672.9660431902 0.0339568098
27 644.9244376332 0.07556236682
16 742.7788044086 4.22119559144
6 744.5693084677 4.43069153235
20 688.0808785252 4.91912147484
18 741.5641004105 5.43589958953
9 685.2137833964 5.78621660361
28 556.5183324867 6.48166751333
25 611.2126762979 9.7873237021
10 720.2058665708 9.79413342923
17 657.6026514805 10.3973485195
19 643.243303891 13.756696109
7 780.630148029 15.369851971
5 783.0062645205 17.9937354795
8 687.9890469092 52.0109530908
me runs, bb's and stolen bases explain

ANOVA states that at Interpretations

least one of our R-squared Our independent variables explain 94.21% o
Significance F independent variables ANOVA states that the model is a good fit, which sugg
F-test
0.0000 predicts our dependent predicts our depen
variable, the model is a
good fit. Broad Interpretation Singles, doubles, homeruns, and

There are two outliers in this regression. The standard

Lower 95% Upper 95% Outliers value outside 37.57 and -37.57 is an outlier. In this ins
-544.470711116 -249.36924338 respective values of -
0.368787524702 0.6681844813
Regression Equation y (Sales)= -396.92 + 0.5185(Singles) + 0.782
0.459343002156 1.106515816
-0.38161470602 1.9416063362 If the number of single runs increases by
1.107624813718 1.70434314 If the number of double runs increases by
Interpretations for t-test
0.210861084824 0.5391310258 If the number of home runs increases by
-0.07772820015 0.4046528766 If the number of bb's increases by 1 u
 Interpretations
riables explain 94.21% of the variance in our dependent variable.
is a good fit, which suggests that at least one of our independent variables
predicts our dependent variable

doubles, homeruns, and bb's significantly predict runs.

egression. The standard error squared yield a value of 37.57, therefore any
7 is an outlier. In this instance, observation 13 and 8 had outliers with their
respective values of -40.57 and 52.01.

0.5185(Singles) + 0.7829 (Doubles) + 1.4060 (HR) + 0.3750 (BB)

single runs increases by 1 unit, then runs increase by 0.5185.
double runs increases by 1 unit, then runs increase by 0.7829.
home runs increases by 1 unit, then runs increase by 1.4060.
of bb's increases by 1 unit, then runs increase by 0.3750.
Observation Height in Feet Sales Height in 5 feet Dummy Height in 6 feet Dummy
1 5 feet 24 1 0
2 6 feet 56 0 1
3 7 feet 40 0 0
4 5 feet 27 1 0
5 5 feet 22 1 0
6 6 feet 70 0 1
7 6 feet 51 0 1
8 7 feet 38 0 0
9 7 feet 33 0 0
10 5 feet 22 1 0
11 6 feet 63 0 1
12 7 feet 48 0 0
SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.941308175178
R Square 0.886061080658
Adjusted R Square 0.860741320804
Standard Error 6.141841924229 12.2836838485
Observations 12

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 2 2640.16666667 1320.083 34.99485 0.0001
Residual 9 339.5 37.72222
Total 11 2979.66666667

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%

Intercept 39.75 3.07092096211 12.944 4.03E-07 32.8030941492
Height in 5 feet Dummy -16 4.3429380736 -3.684142 0.005043 -25.824408471
Height in 6 feet Dummy 20.25 4.3429380736 4.662742 0.001181 10.4255915292

RESIDUAL OUTPUT

Observation Predicted Sales Residuals

6 60 10 *No outliers
12 39.75 8.25
4 23.75 3.25
11 60 3
1 23.75 0.25
3 39.75 0.25
5 23.75 -1.75
8 39.75 -1.75
10 23.75 -1.75
2 60 -4
9 39.75 -6.75
7 60 -9
 Interpretations
R-squared Our independent variables explain 88.61% of the variance in
ANOVA states that the model is a good fit, suggesting that at least one o
F-test
relationship with our dependent variable

Broad Interpretation Both height in 5 feet and height in 6 feet predict

There are no outliers in this dataset. The standard error squared yield a
Outliers
outside 12.28 and -12.28 is an outlier. After analyzing residuals, we

Regression Equation y (Sales) = 39.75 -16(Height in 5 feet) + 20.25(Hei

Upper 95%
46.696905851 Compared to when shelves are positioned 7 feet, shelves that are position
Interpretations for t-test
-6.1755915292 Compared to when shelves are positioned 7 feet, shelves that are positione
30.074408471
retations
xplain 88.61% of the variance in our dependent variable.
fit, suggesting that at least one of our independent variables has a
nship with our dependent variable.

5 feet and height in 6 feet predict our sales.

e standard error squared yield a value of 12.28, therefore any value

er. After analyzing residuals, we conclude there are no outliers.

-16(Height in 5 feet) + 20.25(Height in 6 feet)

d 7 feet, shelves that are positioned 5 feet did worse in sales by $16.
7 feet, shelves that are positioned 6 feet did better in sales by $20.25..