FINAL EXAMINATION

ADVANCED STATISTICS

I. Answer the following using the 5-step test for hypothesis. Identify which statistical
treatment is best for the given study.

1. Labels on 1-gallon cans of paint usually indicate the drying time and the area that can be
covered in one coat. Most brands of paint indicate that, in one coat, a gallon will cover
250 to 500 square feet, depending on the texture of the surface to be painted. One
manufacturer, however, claims that a gallon of its paint will cover 400 square feet
surface area. To this claim, a random sample of 10 (1 gallon) cans of white paint were
used to paint identical areas using the same kind of equipment. The actual areas (in
square feet) covered by these gallons of paint are given here:
310 311 412 368 447
376 303 410 365 350

Do the data present sufficient evidence to indicate that the average coverage differs
from 400 square feet? Use 0.05 level of significance.

ONE-SAMPLE T-TEST
a. H0: μ = 400
There is no significant difference between the drying time and the area that can be covered
in a paint.

Ha: μ ≠ 400
There is significant difference between the drying time and the area that can be covered in a
paint.

b. The level of significance is 0.05 using the two-tailed test or two-directional test. Separating
the rejection and acceptance regions, the critical value/ tabular= ±1.96 from the z-table.

c. Reject when the computed test statistic (z) > critical value which means reject Ho when >
±1.96.

N MEAN STD. STD. T- P- DECISIO

DEVIATIO ERRO CAL VALUE N
N R
Covered 10 365.2 48.42 15.31 23.2 0.00001 Reject HO
in a
paint.

d. From the table, the mean of the Covered in a paint is 365.2 with the standard deviation of
48.42. The standard error is 15.31 and t-computed value is 23.2 with the corresponding p-
value of 0.00001. Since the computed test statistic is 23.2 and the critical value is ±1.96,
then 23.2 > ±1.96. Thus, we reject the HO (Type I Error). There is significant difference
 between the drying time and the area that can be covered in a paint.

e. Indicate that there is statistical evidence to show that there is significant difference
average coverage from 400 square feet.

2. Four sets of identical twins (pairs A, B, C ,and D) were selected at random from a
computer database of identical twins. One child was selected at random from each pair
to form an experimental group. These four children were sent to school. The other four
children were kept at home as a control group. At the end of the school year, the
following IQ scores were obtained:
Pair Experimental Control Group
Group
A 110 111
B 125 120
C 139 128
D 142 135
Does this evidence justify the conclusion that lack of school experience has a
depressing effect on IQ scores? Use the 0.05 level.

Chi-square Test of Independence/ Homogeneity

a. H0: : x2  (Experimental) = x2  (Control)

There is no significant differences between the IQ scores of the group Experimental and
Control.

Ha: x2  (Experimental) ≠ x2  (Control)

There is significant differences between the IQ scores of the group Experimental and Control.

b. The level of significance is 0.05. Separating the rejection and acceptance regions, the chi-
square tabular value is df = n-1
4-1 = 3 Then x2 = 7.815

c. Reject Ho when chi-square tabular computed value > chi-square tabular value which means
reject Ho when x2 > 7.815.

Pairs Control Group Marginal Chi-square Value

Experimental
row
Group
Total
A 110 111 221 0.2576
(112.91 : 0.07) (108.09 : 0.08)
B 125 120 245
(125.17 : 0.00) (119.83 :0.00)
C 139 128 267
(136.41 : 0.05) (130.59 :0.05)
 D 142 135 277
(141.52 : 0.00) (135.48 :0.00)
Marginal column 516 494 1010
Total

d. From the table, the mean and standard deviation of Pairs A,B,C, and D classified as pair A are
Experimental (112.91 : 0.07) and Control (108.09 : 0.08), while pair B are Experimental
(125.17 : 0.00) and Control (119.83 :0.00), while pair C are Experimental (136.41 : 0.05) and
Control (130.59 :0.05), and while pair D are Experimental (141.52 : 0.00)and Control (135.48 :
0.00), respectively. Since the computed chi-square value is 0.2576 and chi-square tabular value is
7.815, then 0.2576 < 7.815. Thus, we accept the null hypothesis (Type II error). There is no
significant differences between the IQ scores of the group Experimental and Control.

e. Therefore, there is no significant differences that that lack of school experience has a
depressing effect on IQ scores.

3. To compare the demand for two different entrees, the manager of a cafeteria recorded
the number of purchases of each entrée on seven consecutive days. The data are shown in
the table. Do the data provide sufficient evidence to indicate a greater mean demand for
one of the entrees? Use 0.05 significance level.

Day A B
Monday 420 391
Tuesday 374 343
Wednesday 434 469
Thursday 395 412
Friday 637 538
 Saturday 594 521
Sunday 679 625

INDEPENDENT SAMPLE T-TEST

a. H0: μ ( ENTREE a) = μ ( ENTREE b)

There is no significant differences between two different entrees.

Ha: μ (ENTREE a) ≠ μ (ENTREE b)

There is significant differences between two different entrees.

b. The level of significance is 0.05 using the two-tailed test or two-directional test. Separating
the rejection and acceptance regions, the critical value/ tabular= ±1.96 from the z-table.

c. Reject when the computed test statistic (z) > critical value which means reject Ho when >
±1.96.

N MEA STD. T- df P- DECISIO

N DEVIATION CAL VALU N
E
ENTRÉE A 7 504.71 16191.24 0.55 6 0.59 Accept HO
ENTRÉE B 7  471.29 9495.57 6

d. From the table, the mean of two Entrees with standard deviation are Entree A (504.71:
16191.24) and Entree B (471.29: 9495.57), respectively. The t-test calculated value was
0.55 with the degrees of freedom of 6 from both groups. P value is found to be 0.59. Since
the computed test statistic is 0.55 and the critical value is ±1.96, then 0.55 < ±1.96. Thus,
we accept the HO (Type II Error). There is no significant difference between the two
different entrees.

e. Indicates, there is no evidence that greater mean demand for one of the entrees.

4. A national home builder wants to compare the prices per 1,000 board feet of standard or
better grade. He randomly selects five suppliers in each of the four cities where the builder
is planning to begin construction. The prices are given in the table.
STATE
1 2 3 4
P241 P216 230 245
 235 220 225 250
238 205 235 238
247 213 228 255
250 220 240 255

Do the data provide sufficient evidence to indicate that the average price per 1000
board feet differs among the four cities? Test using 0.05 level.

ANOVA (f-test)
a. H0: μ1 = μ2 = μ3= μ4
There is no significant difference among the price of the the four cities.

Ha: μ1 ≠ μ2≠ μ3≠ μ4

There is significant difference among the price of the four cities.

b. The level of significance is 0.05 using the two-tailed test or two-directional test. Separating the
rejection and acceptance regions, we will compute for the degrees of freedom.
Df= (c) (r-1) by (c-1)
Df= (4) (5-1) by (4-1)
Df= 16 by 3
F TABULAR = 3.2389

c. Reject when the computed test statistic (z) > critical value which means reject Ho when >
3.2389

d. From the table the sums of the squares of between the treatments and within treatments are 3272.2
and 660, respectively with the degrees of freedom of 3 and 16. The mean squares are 1090.73 and
41.25. Since the computed test statistic is 26.44 and the critical value is 3.2389, then 26.44
>3.6923. Thus, we reject the HO (Type I Error). There is significant difference among the price of
the four cities.
e. Indicates that there are statistical evidence to show that there are significant difference between the
 scores of the four teaching methods.

5. If you play tennis, you know that tennis rackets vary in their physical characteristics.
The data in the accompanying table give measures of bending stiffness and twisting
stiffness as measured by engineering tests for 12 tennis rackets.
Racket Bending Stiffness Twisting Stiffness
1 419 227
2 407 231
3 363 200
4 360 211
5 257 182
6 622 304
7 424 384
8 359 194
9 346 158
10 556 225
11 474 305
12 441 235
Do the data provide evidence that x and y are positively correlated? Calculate the
coefficient of determination and interpret its value.

Pearson Product Correlation Coefficient

a. H0: p = 0
There is no significant differences between bending stiffness and twisting stiffness that tennis
rackets vary in their physical characteristics.

Ha: p ≠ 0
There is no significant differences between bending stiffness and twisting stiffness that tennis
rackets vary in their physical characteristics.

b. The level of significance is 0.05. Separating the rejection and acceptance regions, the
critical/ tabular value p = 0.000

c. Reject Ho when computed Pearson r value > p tabular value which means reject Ho when r
> 0.000.

Bending Stiffness Twisting Stiffness

Bending Stiffness Pearson Correlation 1.000 0.547
Sig. (2-tailed) ….. 0.000
N 12 12
Twisting Pearson Correlation 0.547 1.000
Stiffness
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 …..
 N 12 12

d. From the table, the Pearson Correlation value is 1.000 with N= 12. Since the computed r
value is 0.547 and the p tabular value is 0.000, then 0.547 > 0.000. Thus, we reject the null
hypothesis (Type I error). There is significant differences between bending stiffness and
twisting stiffness that tennis rackets vary in their physical characteristics.

e. Therefore, there is a Moderate high positive correlational linear relationship between the
bending stiffness and twisting stiffness that tennis rackets vary in their physical
characteristics.

6. The percentage of various colors are different for the peanut variety of M&M’s
candies, as reported on the Mars, Incorporated website.
Brown 12%
Yellow 15%
Red 12%
Blue 23%
Orange 23%
Green 15
 A 14-ounce bag of peanut M&M’s is randomly selected and contains 70 brown, 87
yellow, 64 red, 115 blue, 106 orange, and 85 green. Do the data substantiate the
percentages reported by Mars, Incorporated? Use 0.05 level.

Chi-square Goodness of Fit

a. H0: x2 = 12:15:12:23:23:15

There is no evidence the percentages of various colors the ratio of 12:15:12:23:23:15.

Ha: x2 ≠ 12:15:12:23:23:15

There is evidence the percentages of various colors the ratio of 12:15:12:23:23:15.

b. The level of significance is 0.05. Separating the rejection and acceptance regions, the chi-
square tabular value is df = n-1
6-1= 5. x2 = 11.070.

c. Reject Ho when chi-square tabular computed value > chi-square tabular value which means
reject Ho when x2 > 11.070.
colors RATIO OBSERVED EXPECTED DIFF. SQ/EX FR
Brown 12% 70 63.24 or 63 0.85

Yellow 15% 87 79.05 or 79 0.89

Red 12% 64 63.24 or 63 0.1

Blue 23% 115 121.21 or 121 -0.56

Orange 23% 106 121.21 or 121 -1.56

Green 15% 85 79.05 or 79 0.67

TOTAL 100% 527 527 x2 = 4.21

d. From the table from the table, the chi-square ratio is 12:15:12:23:23:15 with the observed
frequency and expected frequency O (70, 87, 64, 115, 106, 85) and E ( 63.24, 79.05, 63.24,
121.21, 121.21, 79.05), respectively. Since the computed chi-square value is 4.21 and the
chi-square tabular value is 11.070, then 4.21 <11.070. Thus, we accept the null hypothesis.
There is no evidence the percentages of various colors the ratio of 12:15:12:23:23:15.

e. It implies that there is no sufficient evidence the percentages of various colors reported by
Mars, Incorporated.