Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

"Mountain Biking May Reduce Fertility in Men, Study Says" was the headline of an article appearing in the San Luis Obispo Tribune (December 3,2002 ). This conclusion was based on an Austrian study that compared sperm counts of avid mountain bikers (those who ride at least 12 hours per week) and nonbikers. Ninety percent of the avid mountain bikers studied had low sperm counts, as compared to \(26 \%\) of the nonbikers. Suppose that these percentages were based on independent samples of 100 avid mountain bikers and 100 non-bikers and that it is reasonable to view these samples as representative of Austrian avid mountain bikers and nonbikers. a. Do these data provide convincing evidence that the proportion of Austrian avid mountain bikers with low sperm count is higher than the proportion of Austrian nonbikers? b. Based on the outcome of the test in Part (a), is it reasonable to conclude that mountain biking 12 hours per week or more causes low sperm count? Explain.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Yes, based on these data, the proportion of Austrian avid mountain bikers with low sperm count appears to be higher than the proportion of nonbikers with low sperm count. Nevertheless, it's not reasonable to conclude that mountain biking 12 hours per week or more causes low sperm count, because although there is a strong correlation, the cause-effect relationship has not been confirmed.

Step by step solution

01

Formulate the hypotheses

The null hypothesis \(H_{0}\) is that the proportion of avid mountain bikers (\(p_{1}\)) with low sperm count is equal to the proportion of non-bikers (\(p_{2}\)). The alternative hypothesis \(H_{1}\) is that \(p_{1}\) (the proportion of avid mountain bikers) is greater than \(p_{2}\) (the proportion of non-bikers), in mathematical terms: \(H_{0}: p_{1} = p_{2}\) vs \(H_{1}: p_{1} > p_{2}\).
02

Calculate the test statistic

First, calculate the pooled sample proportion (\(p\)). This is the total number of successes (low sperm counts) divided by the total sample size (\(n\)). Here, \(p = (0.90*100 + 0.26*100) / (100 + 100) = 0.58\). Second, calculate the standard error of the sampling distribution which is \(\sqrt{ p * ( 1 - p ) * [ (1/n_{1}) + (1/n_{2}) ] } = \sqrt{ 0.58 * ( 1 - 0.58 ) * [ (1/100) + (1/100) ] } = 0.070\). The test statistic (Z) is then \(Z = (p_{1} - p_{2}) / SE = (0.90 - 0.26) / 0.070 = 9.14\).
03

Find the p-value

The test is one-sided, so we only consider the right tail. The p-value is the area to the right of the test statistic on the standard normal distribution. With a Z-score of 9.14, this area is essentially zero, meaning that the p-value is practically 0 and much smaller than any usual level of significance \(\alpha\) (0.05, 0.01, etc). Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis.
04

Answer the second question from the problem

The data provide very strong evidence that the percentage of avid mountain bikers with low sperm count is greater than non-bikers. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that biking more causes low sperm count, only that there is a strong association between the two. This is because there could be other factors affecting sperm count not accounted for in this study. The cause can only be determined by conducting experiments.
05

Conclusion

The data provides evidence that the proportion of low sperm count is higher among avid mountain bikers compared to non-bikers. However, it is not enough to conclude that the increase in biking hours causes low sperm count.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Statistical Significance
Understanding statistical significance is essential when interpreting the results of studies like the one comparing the sperm counts of avid mountain bikers and non-bikers. To deem a finding 'statistically significant', it means there is a very low probability that the observed effect or difference happened by chance, given that the null hypothesis is true. It is typically assessed by using a threshold value, or 'alpha level', such as 0.05. If the p-value obtained in a hypothesis test is less than the alpha level, the result is considered statistically significant.

In our exercise, with a p-value near zero and well below the common alpha level of 0.05, the result is statistically significant. This suggests that the differences observed in the sperm counts between the two groups are unlikely to have occurred due to random variation alone.
Null and Alternative Hypotheses
In hypothesis testing, we start by setting up two opposing statements: the null hypothesis (\(H_0\)) and the alternative hypothesis (\(H_a\) or \(H_1\)). The null hypothesis represents a position of skepticism, indicating that there is no effect or no difference, while the alternative suggests the opposite.

In the exercise, \(H_0: p_{1} = p_{2}\) suggests that the proportion of low sperm counts among avid bikers and non-bikers is the same, whereas \(H_1: p_{1} > p_{2}\) suggests a higher proportion in avid bikers. The goal of hypothesis testing is to determine if enough evidence exists to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative. In conclusion, the data led to the rejection of the null hypothesis, indicating that the proportion of low sperm count is statistically significantly higher in avid mountain bikers.
P-value
The p-value plays a central role in hypothesis testing as it measures the strength of the evidence against the null hypothesis. Specifically, the p-value represents the probability of observing test results as extreme as, or more extreme than, the results actually observed, assuming the null hypothesis is true.

In this case study, a p-value close to 0 indicates a very low probability that the significant difference in sperm count between bikers and non-bikers is due to random chance. The smaller the p-value, the stronger the evidence to reject the null hypothesis. Thus, with a p-value much lower than any conventional alpha level, the evidence strongly favors the alternative hypothesis.
Causality vs Association
Differentiating causality from association is crucial in interpreting results from observational studies. An association indicates a relationship between two variables but does not prove one causes the other. Causality, on the other hand, implies that one event is a direct result of the other.

Though our exercise revealed a strong statistical association between mountain biking and low sperm counts, this does not establish causality. There could be lurking variables or confounding factors affecting the outcome. To determine causality, controlled experiments, which can isolate variables and establish direct cause-and-effect relationships, are necessary. Until such an experiment is conducted, we can only conclude that an association exists between the variables, not that increased biking hours cause reduced sperm counts.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

The paper "The Psychological Consequences of Money" (Science [2006]: \(1154-1156\) ) describes several experiments designed to investigate the way in which money can change behavior. In one experiment, participants completed one of two versions of a task in which they were given lists of five words and were asked to rearrange four of the words to create a sensible phrase. For one group, half of the 30 unscrambled phrases related to money, whereas the other half were phrases that were unrelated to money. For the second group (the control group), none of the 30 unscrambled phrases related to money. Participants were 44 students at Florida State University. Participants received course credit and \(\$ 2\) for their participation. The following description of the experiment is from the paper: Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, in which they descrambled phrases that primed money or neutral concepts. Then participants completed some filler questionnaires, after which the experimenter told them that the experiment was finished and gave them a false debriefing. This step was done so that participants would not connect the donation opportunity to the experiment. As the experimenter exited the room, she mentioned that the lab was taking donations for the University Student Fund and that there was a box by the door if the participant wished to donate. Amount of money donated was the measure of helping. We found that participants primed with money donated significantly less money to the student fund than participants not primed with money \([t(38)=2.13, P<0.05]\) The paper also gave the following information on amount donated for the two experimental groups. a. Explain why the random assignment of participants to experimental groups is important in this experiment. b. Use the given information to verify the values of the test statistic and degrees of freedom (38, given in parentheses just after the \(t\) in the quote from the paper) and the statement about the \(P\) -value. Assume that both sample sizes are 22 . c. Do you think that use of the two-sample \(t\) test was appropriate in this situation? Hint: Are the assumptions required for the two-sample \(t\) test reasonable?

In a study of malpractice claims where a settlement had been reached, two random samples were selected: a random sample of 515 closed malpractice claims that were found not to involve medical errors and a random sample of 889 claims that were found to involve errors (New England Journal of Medicine [2006]: \(2024-2033\) ). The following statement appeared in the referenced paper: "When claims not involving errors were compensated, payments were significantly lower on average than were payments for claims involving errors \((\$ 313,205\) vs. \(\$ 521,560, P=0.004) . "\) a. What hypotheses must the researchers have tested in order to reach the stated conclusion? b. Which of the following could have been the value of the test statistic for the hypothesis test? Explain your reasoning. i. \(t=5.00\) ii. \(t=2.65\) iii. \(t=2.33\) iv. \(t=1.47\)

The article "Fish Oil Staves Off Schizophrenia" (USA Today, February 2, \(2 \mathrm{O} 1 \mathrm{O}\) ) describes a study in which 81 patients age 13 to 25 who were considered atrisk for mental illness were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Those in one group took four fish oil capsules daily. The other group took a placebo. After 1 year, \(5 \%\) of those in the fish oil group and \(28 \%\) of those in the placebo group had become psychotic. Is it appropriate to use the two-sample \(z\) test of this section to test hypotheses about the difference in the proportions of patients receiving the fish oil and the placebo treatments who became psychotic? Explain why or why not.

The article "Portable MP3 Player Ownership Reaches New High" (Ipsos Insight, June 29,2006 ) reported that in \(2006,20 \%\) of those in a random sample of 1112 Americans age 12 and older indicated that they owned an MP3 player. In a similar survey conducted in \(2005,\) only \(15 \%\) reported owning an \(\mathrm{MP} 3\) player. Suppose that the 2005 figure was also based on a random sample of size \(1112 .\) Estimate the difference in the proportion of Americans age 12 and older who owned an MP3 player in 2006 and the corresponding proportion for 2005 using a \(95 \%\) confidence interval. Is zero included in the interval? What does this tell you about the change in this proportion from 2005 to \(2006 ?\)

The press release titled "Keeping Score When It counts: Graduation Rates and Academic Progress Rates" (The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport, March 16,2009 ) gave the 2009 graduation rates for African-American basketball players and for white basketball players at every NCAA Division I university with a basketball program. Explain why it is not necessary to use a paired \(t\) test to determine if the mean graduation rate for African-American basketball players differs from the mean graduation rate for white basketball players for Division I schools.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free