1.

A researcher wanted to know if there is a difference in the zone inhibition affected by a certain antibiotic as compared
with a standard at .01 level of significance. The following are the results of the experiment.

Standard x́ 1=3 mm S1=.08 n=9

antibiotic
Test antibiotic x´2=5 mm S2=.03 n=9
a. The null and alternative hypothesis

Null: There is no significant difference between the mean zone inhibition effect of the standard and the test
antibiotic.

H0 : x̄ 1= x̄ 2
Alternative: There is significant difference between the zone inhibition effect of the standard and the test antibiotic.

H0 : x̄ 1 ≠ x̄ 2

b. The appropriate test statistic

Two sample mean test for a sample size of 9
c. The decision rule based on the tabular value

Use two-tailed test (Reject H0 if ZL < 2.576 and if ZR > 2.576)

d. The Computed value and the decision

ZL = - 210.674065 (Z < 2.576)

ZR = 210.674065 (Z > 2.576)

Decision: Reject H0

e. The conclusion /interpretation

Since the computed values are in the rejection zone, reject the null hypothesis. Hence, at 0.01
significance level, the mean zone inhibition effects of the standard and test antibiotic have significant
difference.

2. Test at 0.01 level if significant difference exists between the pretest results of the experimental group and the control
group given the data below.

Experimental Grou Contro Group

Score
f p% l f %

43 - 47 6 12  2 4.1667 

38 - 42 7  14 3  6.25

33 - 37 11  22 3  6.25

28 - 32 8  16 6  12.5

23 - 27 6  12 12  25

 16.666
18 - 22 5  10 8
7

 16.666
13 - 17 5 10 8
7

8 - 12 2 4 6  12.5
For the Experimental Group:

Experimental Group
Score f midpoint % f*m x̄ m-x̄ (m− x̄ )2 f (m−x̄ )2
43 - 47 6 45 12  270 14.6 213.16 1278.96
38 - 42 7 40  14 280 9.6 92.16 645.12
33 - 37 11 35  22 385 4.6 21.16 232.76
28 - 32 8 30  16 240 -0.4 0.16 1.28
30.4
23 - 27 6 25  12 150 -5.4 29.16 174.96
18 - 22 5 20  10 100 -10.4 108.16 540.8
13 - 17 5 15 10 75 -15.4 237.16 1185.8
12 - 08 2 10 4 20 -20.4 416.16 832.32
50 1520 4892

n = 50

x̄ 1=
∑ f ∗m = 1520 =30.4
∑f 50

∑ f (m− x̄)2 = 4892 =99.83673469

S1=
√ n−1 49

For the Control Group:X

Control Group
Score f midpoint % f*m x̄ m-x̄    
43 - 47 2 45 4.1667  90 21.35416667 456.000434 912.0008681
38 - 42 3 40  6.25 120 16.35416667 267.4587674 802.3763021
33 - 37 3 35  6.25 105 11.35416667 128.9171007 386.7513021
28 - 32 6 30  12.5 180 6.354166667 40.37543403 242.2526042
23.64583
23 - 27 12 25  25 300 1.354166667 1.833767361 22.00520833
18 - 22 8 20  16.6667 160 -3.645833333 13.29210069 106.3368056
13 - 17 8 15  16.6667 120 -8.645833333 74.75043403 598.0034722
12 - 08 6 10  12.5 60 -13.64583333 186.2087674 1117.252604
48 1135 4186.979167

n = 48

x̄ 2=
∑ f ∗m = 1135 =23.64583
∑f 48

∑ f (m− x̄)2 = 4186.979167 =89.08466313

S2 =
√ n−1 47

a. The null and alternative hypothesis

Null: There is no significant difference between the mean pretest results of the experimental and control group
 H0 : x̄ 1= x̄ 2
Alternative: There is significant difference between the mean pretest results of the experimental and control group

H0 : x̄ 1 ≠ x̄ 2

b. The appropriate test statistic

Two sample mean test for a sample size of 50 and 48
c. The decision rule based on the tabular value

Use one-tailed test (Reject H0 if Z ≥ 2.576)

d. The Computed value and the decision

Z = 0.3536833189 (Z < 2.576)

Decision: Accept H0

e. The conclusion /interpretation

Since the computed value is less than the tabular value of 2.576, this means that the researcher failed to reject
then null hypothesis. Therefore, there is significant difference between the mean pretest results of the
experimental and control group

3. The achievement test results in English showed that the 1, 625 grade five pupils had a mean performance of 38.19
and a standard deviation of 13.25. Would you agree to this claim if a random sample of 50 grade five pupils revealed
a mean performance of 35.35 and standard deviation of 9.05. Use 5 percent level of significance
a. The null and alternative hypothesis

Null: The 1,625 grade five pupils do not have a mean performance of 38.19

H0 : μ ≠38.19
Alternative: The 1,625 grade five pupils do have a mean performance of 38.19

H0 : μ=38.19
b. The appropriate test statistic
One sample mean test for a sample size of 50
c. The decision rule based on the tabular value

Use one-tailed test (Reject H0 if Z ≤ - 1.645)

d. The Computed value and the decision

Z = - 0.30303122 (Z > - 1.645)

Decision: Accept H0

e. The conclusion /interpretation

Since the computed value is greater than the tabular value of - 1.645, this means that the researcher failed to
reject then null hypothesis. Therefore, the 1,625 grade five pupils do not have a mean performance of 38.19.
4. In order to investigate the relationship between mean job tenure in years among workers who have a bachelor’s
degree or higher and those who do not, random samples of each type of worker were taken, with the following results.
n Mean s
Bachelor’s degree or higher 155 5.2 1.3
No degree 210 5.0 1.5
a. The null and alternative hypothesis

Null: There is no significant relationship between having a bachelor’s degree or higher and having a long job
tenure

Alternative: There is a significant relationship between having a bachelor’s degree or higher and having a long job
tenure

The appropriate test statistic

two sample mean test for a sample size of 155 and 210 (assume a level of significance of 5%)
b. The decision rule based on the tabular value

Use one-tailed test (Reject H0 if Z ≥ 1.960)

c. The Computed value and the decision

Z = 1.360276346 (Z < 1.960)

Decision: Accept H0

d. The conclusion /interpretation

Since the computed value is less than the tabular value of 1.960, this means that the researcher failed to reject
then null hypothesis. Therefore, there is no significant relationship between having a bachelor’s degree or higher
and having a long job tenure.

5. A kinesiologist claims that the resting heart rate of men aged 18 to 25 who exercise regularly is more than five beats
per minute less than that of men who do not exercise regularly. Men in each category were selected at random and
their resting heart rates were measured, with the results shown.
n mean s
Regular exercise 40 63 1.0
No regular exercise 30 71 1.2
a. The null and alternative hypothesis

Null: Men aged 18 to 25 who exercise regularly have a lower resting heart rate than women who do not exercise
regularly.

Alternative: Men aged 18 to 25 who exercise regularly have a higher resting heart rate than women who do not
exercise regularly.

b. The appropriate test statistic

two sample mean test for a sample size of 40 and 30 (assume a level of significance of 5%)
c. The decision rule based on the tabular value

Use one-tailed test (Reject H0 if Z ≤ - 1.960)

d. The Computed value and the decision

Z = - 29.60932841 (Z < -1.960)

Decision: Accept H0

e. The conclusion /interpretation

Since the computed value is less than the tabular value of - 1.960, this means that the researcher failed to reject
then null hypothesis. Therefore, men aged 18 to 25 who exercise regularly have a lower resting heart rate than
women who do not exercise regularly.