Vazquez 1

Confidence Intervals for a Population Proportion

Feat of Strength #5
by Carlos Vazquez

Introduction

Once again the statistics supreme overlord, who goes by the name

Onilletloc, has called upon me to solve a problem of utmost importance. As

always, I will try my hardest too appease my oppressor and solve this feat of

strength.

I began by taking a random sample of 100 voters from a metropolitan

area. Of the 100 voters, I discovered that 60% of them favor the liberal

congressional candidate. Using this information, I need to find the 95%

confidence interval for the population proportion. Also, I must calculate the

value of p̂ and generate a 95% confidence interval. This can be done by

generating a one hundred random samples of 50 voters from the

metropolitan area where 60% of the voters favor the liberal congressional

candidate. Lastly, I must analyze the sample proportions that did not

produce successful confidence intervals and also interpret the value of p̂.

Analysis

I must generate several confidence intervals and statistical inferences for

the many situations involving voters who favor the liberal congressional
 Vazquez 2

candidate in a metropolitan area. 60% of the 100 voters favor the liberal

candidate and I need to calculate the 95% confidence interval for this

population proportion. In order to calculate this, we must obtain our value of

p̂ from our calculator. From my calculator I received a randomized value, .55.

This randomized value will be the value of the sample proportion a.k.a. p̂. p̂

is the sample proportion of the voters who favor the liberal congressional

candidate. The next step in generating a confidence interval is checking for

conditions. The first condition is that the sample must be a simple random

sample, and in our case we are told it is so. The second condition that must

be checked is normaility. The distribution is normal because (55 ≥ 10) and

(45 ≥ 10), which is a equation to check for normality. The last condition that

must be met is independence. I know that it is independent because (N ≥

1000), which is a equation to check for independence. I also think it should

be noted that this is a one sample z procedure as we know the standard

deviation. Now that I have established that all three of the conditions are

met, I can finally formulate the 95% confidence interval;

.55 + / - 1.96(√(.55 x .45 / 100)). Therefore, I am 95% confident that the

population proportion of voters who favor the liberal congressional candidate

is between the intervals .4525 and .6475. It should be noted that the value of

the population proportion, .60, is within the interval. The confidence interval

is .1950 wide but if a narrower confidence interval was needed, all I would
 Vazquez 3

need to do is increase the sample size. For example, if I were to take a

sample size 4 times as large, 400 voters, the width of the confidence interval

would cut in half. After checking the same conditions that were previously

stated, one would just need to change the value 1.96 to 1.645 in the above

formula in order to find a 90% confidence interval for p. In that case, I am

90% confident that the population proportion of voters who favor the liberal

congressional candidate to be between the intervals .4682 and .6318. In

comparison to the 95% confidence interval, the width of this 90% confidence

interval is smaller in width, clocking in at .1636. Also, this interval does

contain the value of the population proportion of .60 as well. As before, when

we want to change our confidence level the only thing that changes is the

value of z, so when finding the 99% confidence interval all I have to do is

exchange the 1.96 to 2.576 in the formula above. I am 99% confident that

the population proportion who favor the liberal congressional candidate is

between .4218 and .6782. The width of this 99% confidence interval is

significantly larger than the widths of the 95% and 90% confidence intervals,

which is why one can be more confident that the population proportion falls

within its intervals. Unsurprisingly, the 99% confidence interval contains the

population proportion of .60.

In order to determine how many intervals actually contain the

population proportion of .60, I took 100 random samples consisting of 50

 Vazquez 4

voters, where 60% of the voters favor the liberal congressional candidate of

a metropolitan area. In addition, I would also need to find the 95%

confidence interval for the population proportions as well as the values of p̂.

By generating a list of sample proportions and generating the confidence

intervals in separate lists on the calculator I can record the amount of

intervals that do not contain .60. I found that of the 100 values, only 4 did

not contain .60 in the interval. Therefore, 96% of my intervals were

successful in containing the true population proportion of .60.

The sample proportions that were unsuccessful in containing the

population proportion are intriguing and I would like to find out some more

information. I must determine the mean and standard deviation using the

calculator on our list of the values of p̂ and intervals in order to calculate if

the values of p̂ were high or low. From the calculator, I determined .598 as

the mean and .08 as the standard deviation for the sample of 100 p̂. For the

values of p̂ that were not successful, the z score is 2.4. This explains why

the confidence intervals were not accurate indicators of the population as it

had a high sample proportion. With the data in order on my list on the

calculator, it is easy to see that the highest value of p̂ that was successful in

containing the population proportion of .60 was .72 and the smallest that did

so was .42. For each of the smallest and highest values of p̂, it is clear that a

90% confidence interval will not be successful in containing the population

 Vazquez 5

proportion of .60 but I believe that a 99% confidence interval would be. In

order to verify my hypothesis, I must check the interval. The first step as

always is checking the conditions, but since those were already met I can

proceed. For the smallest value of p̂, which was .42, that is successful for the

90% interval, I am 90% confident that the population proportion of the voters

who support the liberal congressional candidate is between the intervals .

3052 and

.535. For the highest value of p̂, which was .72, that is successful for the 90%

interval, I am 90% confident that the population proportion of the voters who

support the liberal congressional candidate is between the intervals .6155

and

.824. For the smallest value of p̂, which is .42, that is successful for the 99%

interval, I am 99% confident that the population proportion of the voters who

support the liberal congressional candidate is between the intervals .24 and .

6. For the highest value of p̂, which is .72, that is successful for the 99%

interval, I am 99% confident that the population proportion of the voters who

support the liberal congressional candidate is between the intervals .556 and

.884. It should be noted that the mean width of the 95% confidence intervals

is 1.64, the mean width of the 90% confidence intervals is 1.376, and the

mean width of the 99% confidence intervals is 2.15. The width of a

 Vazquez 6

confidence interval increases as the confidence level increases in size

because more values are included.

Conclusion

By analyzing the data in various situations and using many different

methods, I was able to find the true meaning behind the data. I checked how

well the sample proportions were contained in the confidence intervals as

well was their validity. Also, I learned the reasons behind why a change in

the value of p̂ would cause an interval not to include the population

proportion. In addition, I analyzed the success and failures of confidence

intervals. Lastly, I figured out how changes in the z star values altered the

interval outcomes. Hopefully all of my hard work will please Onilletloc, the

fire breathing dictator of room M3.