ACTIVITY: MAKING DECISIONS WITH DATA

INSTRUCTION:
1. This activity can be done individually or by pair.
2. Answer the following questions. Show your complete solution. For calculations done using the
scientific calculator, you can just write the formula and then the answer.
3. Make sure to write Ho and Ha, whenever applicable. Specify also the critical values.
4. Type your answer for each question in word and save in pdf format.

QUESTIONS:
1. A standard serum sample known to contain 105 meq/L chloride was analyzed by coulometric
titration with silver ion. Tripliate results of 101, 103 and 98 meq/L were obtained. Calculate the
a) mean value
b) absolute error
c) the relative error (in %)

2. Consider the set of data: 95.65, 95.64, 95.66, 96.67, and 95.63 % Ag. Calculate the
a) mean
b) median
c) range
d) standard deviation
e) variance

3. The following replicate molarities were obtained when standardizing a solution: 0.1067, 0.1071,
0.1066, and 0.1050 M. Assuming no determinate/systematic errors, within what range are you
95% certain that the true mean value of the molarity falls?

4. Replicate water samples are analyzed for water hardness with the following results: 102.2, 102.8,
103.1, 104.6, 103.9, 104.2 and 102.3 ppm CaCO 3. Is there any outlier at 95% confidence level? Do
both Q-test and Grubbs test.

5. The Ca content of powdered mineral samples were analyzed four times by two methods believed
to have similar precision. The results are shown below. Are the mean values for these two
methods the same at the 90% confidence level?

Method Percent Ca (w/w)

Method 1 0.0271 0.0282 0.0279 0.0271
Method 2 0.0271 0.0268 0.0263 0.0274

6. A graduate student wishes to improve the precision of a new drug assay. This student finds that
one method of sample preparation gives a measured concentration of 1.025 ± 0.002 M for five
replicate measurements of the drug, where the value in parentheses represents one standard
deviation of the overall population of the results. A second method of sample preparation gives a
drug concentration of 1.017 ± 0.011 M for five replicate measurements of the same sample. Was
there any significant improvement in the precision in going from one approach to the other when
these results are compared at the 95% confidence level?