Question

Smoking and Cotinine. Smoking during pregnancy is hazardous to both the mother and baby, Passive smoking, or inhalation of second-hand smoke, is also a concern. In the article "detection of Cotinine in Neonate Meconium as a Marker for Nicotine Exposure in Utero" (Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, Vol. $10$no. $\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$2$}\right.$, Pp .$96-105$), N. Sherif et al. studied whether active smoking or passive-smoking mothers were passing along harmful chemicals to their babies. The level of cotinine in a newborn's first meconium, which is the infant's stool, is reported on the WeissStats site for independent samples of active-, passive-, and non-smoking mothers. Cotinine levels are measured in nanograms per millilitre (ng/mL). Use the technology of your choice to decide whether presuming that the assumptions of normal populations and equal population standard deviations are met is reasonable.

Short answer

The presuming that the assumptions of normal populations and equal Population standard deviations are met is not reasonable.

Step-by-step solution

Given information

The data values of active, passive, and non.

Explanation

Draw the normal probability map of active and find the standard deviation using any software

Draw the normal probability plot of passive.

Draw the normal probability plot of Non.

We have the standard deviations of

Active $=121.2$,

Passive $=61.8$,

Non $=19.21$

The ratio of largest to smallest standard deviations is

$=\frac{121.2}{19.21}$

$=6.31>2$

It indicates that the standard deviation assumptions have been broken. As a result, the premise of equal population standard deviations is violated.

As a result, it is not fair to assume that the assumptions of normal populations and equal population standard deviations are met.