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

Does consuming beer attract mosquitoes? A study done in Burkino Faso, Africa, about the spread of malaria investigated the connection between beer consumption and mosquito attraction. \({ }^{8}\) In the experiment, 25 volunteers consumed a liter of beer while 18 volunteers consumed a liter of water. The volunteers were assigned to the two groups randomly. The attractiveness to mosquitoes of each volunteer was tested twice: before the beer or water and after. Mosquitoes were released and caught in traps as they approached the volunteers. For the beer group, the total number of mosquitoes caught in the traps before consumption was 434 and the total was 590 after consumption. For the water group, the total was 337 before and 345 after. (a) Define the relevant parameter(s) and state the null and alternative hypotheses for a test to see if, after consumption, the average number of mosquitoes is higher for people who drink beer. (b) Compute the average number of mosquitoes per volunteer before consumption for each group and compare the results. Are the two sample means different? Do you expect that this difference is just the result of random chance? (c) Compute the average number of mosquitoes per volunteer after consumption for each group and compare the results. Are the two sample means different? Do you expect that this difference is just the result of random chance? (d) If the difference in part (c) provides convincing evidence for the alternative hypothesis, what can we conclude about beer consumption and mosquitoes? (e) If the difference in part (c) provides convincing evidence for the alternative hypothesis, do we have evidence that beer consumption increases mosquito attraction? Why or why not?

Short Answer

Expert verified
The exercise involves the formulation of null and alternative hypotheses to examine the claim that beer consumption attracts more mosquitoes. The average number of mosquitoes per volunteer both before and after consumption were calculated, with the results favoring beer consumption attracting more mosquitoes. This supports the alternative hypothesis, suggesting beer consumption may increase mosquito attraction, though further research would be needed for definitive conclusions.

Step by step solution

01

Formulate Hypotheses

First, we need to define the null and alternative hypotheses regarding beer consumption and mosquito attraction. The null hypothesis (\(H_0\)) could be that there is no difference in mosquito attraction for beer consumers after consumption as compared to before. The alternative hypothesis (\(H_1\)) might be that there is a significant increase in mosquito attraction for beer consumers after consumption.
02

Calculate averages before consumption

Let's proceed to calculate the average number of mosquitoes per volunteer before consumption for both beer and water groups. For beer, it's \(434/25 = 17.36\) mosquitoes per volunteer and for water, it's \(337/18 = 18.72\) mosquitoes per volunteer. Even though there is a difference, at this point, it could be random chance as we have not applied any statistical test yet.
03

Calculate averages after consumption

Like above, now we calculate averages after consumption. For beer, it's \(590/25 = 23.6\) and for water, it's \(345/18 = 19.17\). It looks like the average for the beer group is higher after consumption compared to the water group.
04

Drawing Conclusions

If the difference in the above step provides convincing evidence for the alternative hypothesis, it means that consuming beer does make a person more attractive to mosquitoes than drinking water.
05

Confirming The Result

If the difference in step 3 indeed supports the alternative hypothesis, this gives us evidence that beer consumption appears to increase mosquito attraction. However, to definitively say that beer consumption is the cause of increased mosquito attraction, further controlled experiments may be needed, where all other potential factors are accounted for.

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!

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

Eating Breakfast Cereal and Conceiving Boys Newscientist.com ran the headline "Breakfast Cereals Boost Chances of Conceiving Boys," based on an article which found that women who eat breakfast cereal before becoming pregnant are significantly more likely to conceive boys. \({ }^{42}\) The study used a significance level of \(\alpha=0.01\). The researchers kept track of 133 foods and, for each food, tested whether there was a difference in the proportion conceiving boys between women who ate the food and women who didn't. Of all the foods, only breakfast cereal showed a significant difference. (a) If none of the 133 foods actually have an effect on the gender of a conceived child, how many (if any) of the individual tests would you expect to show a significant result just by random chance? Explain. (Hint: Pay attention to the significance level.) (b) Do you think the researchers made a Type I error? Why or why not? (c) Even if you could somehow ascertain that the researchers did not make a Type I error, that is, women who eat breakfast cereals are actually more likely to give birth to boys, should you believe the headline "Breakfast Cereals Boost Chances of Conceiving Boys"? Why or why not?

Using the complete voting records of a county to see if there is evidence that more than \(50 \%\) of the eligible voters in the county voted in the last election.

After exercise, massage is often used to relieve pain, and a recent study 33 shows that it also may relieve inflammation and help muscles heal. In the study, 11 male participants who had just strenuously exercised had 10 minutes of massage on one quadricep and no treatment on the other, with treatment randomly assigned. After 2.5 hours, muscle biopsies were taken and production of the inflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 was measured relative to the resting level. The differences (control minus massage) are given in Table 4.11 . $$ \begin{array}{lllllllllll} 0.6 & 4.7 & 3.8 & 0.4 & 1.5 & -1.2 & 2.8 & -0.4 & 1.4 & 3.5 & -2.8 \end{array} $$ (a) Is this an experiment or an observational study? Why is it not double blind? (b) What is the sample mean difference in inflammation between no massage and massage? (c) We want to test to see if the population mean difference \(\mu_{D}\) is greater than zero, meaning muscle with no treatment has more inflammation than muscle that has been massaged. State the null and alternative hypotheses. (d) Use Statkey or other technology to find the p-value from a randomization distribution. (e) Are the results significant at a \(5 \%\) level? At a \(1 \%\) level? State the conclusion of the test if we assume a \(5 \%\) significance level (as the authors of the study did).

It is believed that sunlight offers some protection against multiple sclerosis (MS) since the disease is rare near the equator and more prevalent at high latitudes. What is it about sunlight that offers this protection? To find out, researchers \({ }^{23}\) injected mice with proteins that induce a condition in mice comparable to MS in humans. The control mice got only the injection, while a second group of mice were exposed to UV light before and after the injection, and a third group of mice received vitamin D supplements before and after the injection. In the test comparing UV light to the control group, evidence was found that the mice exposed to UV suppressed the MS-like disease significantly better than the control mice. In the test comparing mice getting vitamin D supplements to the control group, the mice given the vitamin D did not fare significantly better than the control group. If the p-values for the two tests are 0.472 and 0.002 , which p-value goes with which test?

Female primates visibly display their fertile window, often with red or pink coloration. Do humans also do this? A study \(^{18}\) looked at whether human females are more likely to wear red or pink during their fertile window (days \(6-14\) of their cycle \()\). They collected data on 24 female undergraduates at the University of British Columbia, and asked each how many days it had been since her last period, and observed the color of her shirt. Of the 10 females in their fertile window, 4 were wearing red or pink shirts. Of the 14 females not in their fertile window, only 1 was wearing a red or pink shirt. (a) State the null and alternative hypotheses. (b) Calculate the relevant sample statistic, \(\hat{p}_{f}-\hat{p}_{n f}\), for the difference in proportion wearing a pink or red shirt between the fertile and not fertile groups. (c) For the 1000 statistics obtained from the simulated randomization samples, only 6 different values of the statistic \(\hat{p}_{f}-\hat{p}_{n f}\) are possible. Table 4.7 shows the number of times each difference occurred among the 1000 randomizations. Calculate the p-value.

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