Scribd
Upload
280 views

Enabling Assessment in HT Part 1 CRUTO

The document provides two hypothesis testing problems. The first problem tests whether the average capital share of members of a cooperative is significantly different than 16,000. It is found that the average of 15,814 is not significantly different from 16,000 at the 1% level of significance. The second problem tests whether the proportion of defective items from a machine is greater than 5%. With 48 defects out of 800 items, the proportion of 6% is not significantly greater than 5% at the 5% level of significance. Therefore, there is no reason to get rid of the machine.

Uploaded by

Ehron Rivera
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
280 views

Enabling Assessment in HT Part 1 CRUTO

The document provides two hypothesis testing problems. The first problem tests whether the average capital share of members of a cooperative is significantly different than 16,000. It is found that the average of 15,814 is not significantly different from 16,000 at the 1% level of significance. The second problem tests whether the proportion of defective items from a machine is greater than 5%. With 48 defects out of 800 items, the proportion of 6% is not significantly greater than 5% at the 5% level of significance. Therefore, there is no reason to get rid of the machine.

Uploaded by

Ehron Rivera
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

De La Salle University – Dasmariñas

COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND COMPUTER STUDIES MATHEMATICS


AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT
City of Dasmariñas, Cavite

ENABLING ASSESSMENT
Hypothesis Testing Part 1
Score:
NAME: Ivan Louie M. Cruto DATE: May 8, 2021

COURSE/YEAR & SECTION: ECE 11 PROF.: Mr Jerome Buhay

Read, understand and solve each item carefully. Show your complete solution on the answer sheet column.

Direction: Solve each problem showing all the necessary steps and computations.
1. Given are the capital shares of 12 randomly chosen member accounts of a certain cooperative.
Shared Capital: 7500, 12800, 9650, 13000, 25000, 15000, 15500, 17250, 18600, 21050, 16750,
17800, 15000, 22100, 10210
Can it be claimed that the average capital share of the members is significantly different
from 16,000? Use a 1% level of significance and follow the necessary steps below: (10 points)

i. Null and Alternative Hypothesis (both in symbols and statement form)


Ho:µ=16000
The average capital share of members is not significantly different from 16,000
Ha:µ≠16000
The average capital share of members is significantly different from 16,000
ii. Level of Significance; sample size; test statistics,
S=4802.57, level of significance =0.01, n=15, test statistics: T-Test, Mean=15814
iii. Decision Rule
iv. Computation: Paste here the solution you made using Excel
x
7500 X
12800
9650 Mean 15814
13000 Standard Error 1240.018
25000 Median 15500
15000 Mode 15000
Standard
15500 Deviation 4802.567
17250 Sample Variance 23064654
18600 Kurtosis -0.2848
21050 Skewness 0.122514
16750 Range 17500
17800 Minimum 7500
15000 Maximum 25000
22100 Sum 237210
10210 Count 15

v. Decision AND Conclusion:


Decision: Failed to reject Ho as the computed t value is outside the shaded region.
Conclusion: The average capital share of the members is not significantly different
from 16,000

2. A sample of 800 items produced on a new machine showed that 48 of them are defective. The
factory will get rid the machine if the data indicates that the proportion of defective items is
significantly more than 5%. At a significance level of 5%, is there enough evidence to get rid of
the machine? The following steps should be indicated in your answer: (10 points)

i. Null and Alternative Hypothesis (both in symbols and statement form)


Ho:µ≤0.05
The proportion of defective materials is at most 5%
Ha: µ>0.05
The average capital share of members is significantly different from 16,000
ii. Level of Significance; sample size; test statistics
Level of Significance: 0.05, n=800, p=0.06, qo= 0.95
iii. Decision Rule

iv. Computation: Paste here the solution you made using Excel; or write your manual
computation.
v. Decision AND Conclusion:
Decision: Failed to reject Ho since 1.2978 is less than the z critical value of 1.96
Conclusion: There is no reason to get rid of the machine as the proportion of
defective items is at most 5%

You might also like