Identifying Hypotheses In a randomized clinical trial of adults with an acute sore throat, 288 were treated with the drug dexamethasone and 102 of them experienced complete resolution; 277 were treated with a placebo and 75 of them experienced complete resolution (based on data from “Effect of Oral Dexamethasone Without Immediate Antibiotics vs Placebo on Acute Sore Throat in Adults,” by Hayward et al., Journal of the American Medical Association). Identify the null and alternative hypotheses corresponding to the claim that patients treated with dexamethasone and patients given a placebo have the same rate of complete resolution.
Table of contents
- 1. Intro to Stats and Collecting Data1h 14m
- 2. Describing Data with Tables and Graphs1h 56m
- 3. Describing Data Numerically2h 5m
- 4. Probability2h 16m
- 5. Binomial Distribution & Discrete Random Variables3h 6m
- 6. Normal Distribution and Continuous Random Variables2h 11m
- 7. Sampling Distributions & Confidence Intervals: Mean3h 23m
- Sampling Distribution of the Sample Mean and Central Limit Theorem19m
- Distribution of Sample Mean - Excel23m
- Introduction to Confidence Intervals15m
- Confidence Intervals for Population Mean1h 18m
- Determining the Minimum Sample Size Required12m
- Finding Probabilities and T Critical Values - Excel28m
- Confidence Intervals for Population Means - Excel25m
- 8. Sampling Distributions & Confidence Intervals: Proportion2h 10m
- 9. Hypothesis Testing for One Sample5h 8m
- Steps in Hypothesis Testing1h 6m
- Performing Hypothesis Tests: Means1h 4m
- Hypothesis Testing: Means - Excel42m
- Performing Hypothesis Tests: Proportions37m
- Hypothesis Testing: Proportions - Excel27m
- Performing Hypothesis Tests: Variance12m
- Critical Values and Rejection Regions28m
- Link Between Confidence Intervals and Hypothesis Testing12m
- Type I & Type II Errors16m
- 10. Hypothesis Testing for Two Samples5h 37m
- Two Proportions1h 13m
- Two Proportions Hypothesis Test - Excel28m
- Two Means - Unknown, Unequal Variance1h 3m
- Two Means - Unknown Variances Hypothesis Test - Excel12m
- Two Means - Unknown, Equal Variance15m
- Two Means - Unknown, Equal Variances Hypothesis Test - Excel9m
- Two Means - Known Variance12m
- Two Means - Sigma Known Hypothesis Test - Excel21m
- Two Means - Matched Pairs (Dependent Samples)42m
- Matched Pairs Hypothesis Test - Excel12m
- Two Variances and F Distribution29m
- Two Variances - Graphing Calculator16m
- 11. Correlation1h 24m
- 12. Regression3h 33m
- Linear Regression & Least Squares Method26m
- Residuals12m
- Coefficient of Determination12m
- Regression Line Equation and Coefficient of Determination - Excel8m
- Finding Residuals and Creating Residual Plots - Excel11m
- Inferences for Slope31m
- Enabling Data Analysis Toolpak1m
- Regression Readout of the Data Analysis Toolpak - Excel21m
- Prediction Intervals13m
- Prediction Intervals - Excel19m
- Multiple Regression - Excel29m
- Quadratic Regression15m
- Quadratic Regression - Excel10m
- 13. Chi-Square Tests & Goodness of Fit2h 21m
- 14. ANOVA2h 28m
10. Hypothesis Testing for Two Samples
Two Proportions
Problem 9.5.6
Textbook Question
In Exercises 5–8, use (a) randomization and (b) bootstrapping for the indicated exercise from Section 9-1. Compare the results to those obtained in the original exercise.
Exercise 8 in Section 9-1 “Tennis Challenges”
Verified step by step guidance1
Identify the original problem in Exercise 8 of Section 9-1, which involves analyzing data related to tennis challenges. This typically includes determining whether the success rate of challenges is statistically significant or not.
For part (a), randomization: Randomly shuffle the observed data (e.g., success and failure outcomes of tennis challenges) to create a distribution under the null hypothesis. This involves assuming that the observed outcomes are due to random chance. Calculate the test statistic (e.g., proportion of successful challenges) for each randomization iteration.
For part (b), bootstrapping: Use the observed data to create a bootstrap sample by resampling with replacement. Calculate the test statistic (e.g., proportion of successful challenges) for each bootstrap sample. Repeat this process many times to build a bootstrap distribution of the test statistic.
Compare the results: Analyze the distributions obtained from randomization and bootstrapping. Compare these results to the original exercise's findings to determine if the conclusions are consistent across methods.
Interpret the findings: Discuss whether the randomization and bootstrapping methods support the original conclusions about the success rate of tennis challenges. Highlight any differences or similarities in the results.
Verified video answer for a similar problem:This video solution was recommended by our tutors as helpful for the problem above
Video duration:
7mPlay a video:
0 Comments
Key Concepts
Here are the essential concepts you must grasp in order to answer the question correctly.
Randomization
Randomization is a statistical technique used to eliminate bias by randomly assigning subjects to different groups or treatments. This process ensures that each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any group, which helps to create comparable groups and allows for valid inferences about the effects of treatments. In the context of the exercise, randomization can be applied to simulate different scenarios or outcomes based on the original data.
Recommended video:
Guided course
Intro to Random Variables & Probability Distributions
Bootstrapping
Bootstrapping is a resampling method that involves repeatedly drawing samples from a dataset with replacement to estimate the distribution of a statistic. This technique allows statisticians to assess the variability of a statistic without making strong parametric assumptions about the underlying population. In the context of the exercise, bootstrapping can be used to generate confidence intervals or to test hypotheses based on the original data.
Comparison of Results
Comparing results involves analyzing the outcomes obtained from different statistical methods or approaches to determine their similarities and differences. In this case, it refers to evaluating the results from the original exercise against those derived from randomization and bootstrapping. This comparison helps to assess the robustness of the findings and provides insights into the reliability of the statistical methods used.
Recommended video:
Guided course
Difference in Proportions: Hypothesis Tests Example 1
Watch next
Master Difference in Proportions: Hypothesis Tests with a bite sized video explanation from Patrick
Start learningRelated Videos
Related Practice
Textbook Question
87
views
