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

State the null and alternative hypotheses for the statistical test described. Testing to see if there is evidence that a proportion is greater than 0.3 .

Short Answer

Expert verified
The null hypothesis (H0) says that the proportion is equal to 0.3, H0: P = 0.3. The alternative hypothesis (HA) posits that the proportion is greater than 0.3, HA: P > 0.3.

Step by step solution

01

Identify the Null Hypothesis

In the context of this given problem, the null hypothesis, denoted as H0, would claim that the proportion is equal to 0.3. So, H0: P = 0.3
02

Identify the Alternative Hypothesis

The alternative hypothesis, denoted as HA or H1, is a claim that challenges the null hypothesis. In this case, the alternative hypothesis would assert that the proportion is greater than 0.3. So, HA: P > 0.3

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 Hypothesis Testing
To understand the foundation of data analysis, we must delve into statistical hypothesis testing. Think of a hypothesis as a kind of educated guess about a population parameter, such as a mean or a proportion. When engaging in hypothesis testing, we essentially put these guesses to the test.

In this process, we collect sample data and, based on statistical measures, decide whether the evidence is strong enough to reject our initial assumption, or hypothesis, about the population characteristic. The ultimate goal of this method is not to prove a viewpoint, but to assess the strength of evidence against the null hypothesis, a way to measure if there is anything interesting happening in our data set that could challenge widely accepted beliefs.

Key Steps in Hypothesis Testing

  • Set up the null and alternative hypotheses.
  • Choose the significance level and the appropriate test statistic.
  • Calculate the test statistic and the p-value from the sample data.
  • Compare the p-value with the significance level to make a decision.
It's like a courtroom trial for statistics where the null hypothesis is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, which, in statistical terms, corresponds to the p-value being less than the pre-defined significance level.
Proportion Test
Among the various types of hypothesis tests, the proportion test comes into play when we want to test hypotheses about population proportions.

Imagine we have a classroom where a handful of students assert that more than 30% of students in all fifth-grade classes prefer reading to sports. Here, we would use a proportion test to compare the specific proportion in question—here being the 30% preference rate—with an observed proportion from sample data of fifth graders.

A proportion test can be a one-sample z-test or a chi-squared test for goodness of fit, depending on what we know about the population and the sample size. When performing a proportion test, the central piece is the proportion in the null hypothesis, and we compare it to the proportion in our sample data to see if there's a statistically significant difference between them.
Null Hypothesis H0
The null hypothesis, often denoted as H0, is a specific statement about a population parameter that we assume to be true until the evidence suggests otherwise.

Using the metaphor of the justice system again, think of the null hypothesis as the presumption of 'no effect' or 'no difference.' It's the status quo that needs to be challenged by the alternative hypothesis. For our example of testing whether the proportion is greater than 0.3, the null hypothesis would be that the proportion is exactly 0.3, or H0: P = 0.3.

This means if we were to take multiple random samples from the population, we would expect the proportion to be 0.3 in the long run if the null hypothesis is true. The data collected from our sample will ultimately determine if we retain this hypothesis or have enough evidence to reject it in favor of the alternative hypothesis.
Alternative Hypothesis HA
The alternative hypothesis, often represented by HA or H1, is the challenger to the null hypothesis. It represents an assertion that indicates the presence of an effect, a difference, or a change from the status quo.

In our classroom case, where we test if more than 30% of fifth graders prefer reading to sports, the alternative hypothesis is looking for evidence to support that claim. Formally, it's stated as HA: P > 0.3, suggesting that the true proportion is greater than the 30% stated in the null hypothesis.

This is what we are trying to find evidence for through our sample data. If the data strongly indicate that the proportion is indeed higher than 0.3, then we would reject the null hypothesis in favor of this alternative. However, if the data do not show a significant difference, we would not reject the null hypothesis. It's important to note that 'not rejecting' is not the same as 'accepting' the null hypothesis; it just means there isn't enough evidence to support a change.

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

For each situation described, indicate whether it makes more sense to use a relatively large significance level (such as \(\alpha=0.10\) ) or a relatively small significance level (such as \(\alpha=0.01\) ). Testing to see whether taking a vitamin supplement each day has significant health benefits. There are no (known) harmful side effects of the supplement.

Match the four \(\mathrm{p}\) -values with the appropriate conclusion: (a) The evidence against the null hypothesis is significant, but only at the \(10 \%\) level. (b) The evidence against the null and in favor of the alternative is very strong. (c) There is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis, even at the \(10 \%\) level. (d) The result is significant at a \(5 \%\) level but not at a \(1 \%\) level. I. 0.00008 II. 0.0571 III. 0.0368 IV. \(\quad 0.1753\)

Giving a Coke/Pepsi taste test to random people in New York City to determine if there is evidence for the claim that Pepsi is preferred.

The same sample statistic is used to test a hypothesis, using different sample sizes. In each case, use StatKey or other technology to find the p-value and indicate whether the results are significant at a \(5 \%\) level. Which sample size provides the strongest evidence for the alternative hypothesis? Testing \(H_{0}: p=0.5\) vs \(H_{a}: p>0.5\) using \(\hat{p}=0.58\) with each of the following sample sizes: (a) \(\hat{p}=29 / 50=0.58\) (b) \(\hat{p}=290 / 500=0.58\)

Mating Choice and Offspring Fitness: MiniExperiments Exercise 4.153 explores the question of whether mate choice improves offspring fitness in fruit flies, and describes two seemingly identical experiments yielding conflicting results (one significant, one insignificant). In fact, the second source was actually a series of three different experiments, and each full experiment was comprised of 50 different mini-experiments (runs), 10 each on five different days. (a) Suppose each of the 50 mini-experiments from the first study were analyzed individually. If mating choice has no impact on offspring fitness, about how many of these \(50 \mathrm{p}\) -values would you expect to yield significant results at \(\alpha=0.05 ?\) (b) The 50 p-values, testing the alternative \(H_{a}\) : \(p_{C}>p_{N C}\) (proportion of flies surviving is higher in the mate choice group) are given below: $$ \begin{array}{lllllllllll} \text { Day 1: } & 0.96 & 0.85 & 0.14 & 0.54 & 0.76 & 0.98 & 0.33 & 0.84 & 0.21 & 0.89 \\ \text { Day 2: } & 0.89 & 0.66 & 0.67 & 0.88 & 1.00 & 0.01 & 1.00 & 0.77 & 0.95 & 0.27 \\ \text { Day 3: } & 0.58 & 0.11 & 0.02 & 0.00 & 0.62 & 0.01 & 0.79 & 0.08 & 0.96 & 0.00 \\ \text { Day 4: } & 0.89 & 0.13 & 0.34 & 0.18 & 0.11 & 0.66 & 0.01 & 0.31 & 0.69 & 0.19 \\ \text { Day 5: } & 0.42 & 0.06 & 0.31 & 0.24 & 0.24 & 0.16 & 0.17 & 0.03 & 0.02 & 0.11 \end{array} $$ How many are actually significant using \(\alpha=0.05 ?\) (c) You may notice that two p-values (the fourth and last run on day 3 ) are 0.00 when rounded to two decimal places. The second of these is actually 0.0001 if we report more decimal places. This is very significant! Would it be appropriate and/or ethical to just report this one run, yielding highly statistically significant evidence that mate choice improves offspring fitness? Explain. (d) You may also notice that two of the p-values on day 2 are 1 (rounded to two decimal places). If we had been testing the opposite alternative, \(H_{a}:\) \(p_{C}

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