P. 1
QRB501 / QRB 501 / Week 3 DQs

QRB501 / QRB 501 / Week 3 DQs

|Views: 414|Likes:
Published by Number1Tutor
QRB501 / QRB 501 / Week 3 DQs
QRB501 / QRB 501 / Week 3 DQs

More info:

Published by: Number1Tutor on Jan 06, 2011
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved
List Price: $4.99 Buy Now

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
See more
See less

08/04/2013

$4.99

USD

pdf

text

original

Discussion Questions Week Three 1 Running head: DISCUSSIONS QUESTIONS WEEK THREE

Discussion Questions Week Three

QRB/501

University of Phoenix

and 3 persons scored in the lower 20’s. 46. 28. variance. 15. mode. standard deviation . Most people scored in the 90’s. standard deviation. 55. medium. Stem 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Leaf 5 2 4 6 5 5 0 0 0 0 7 8 9 7 2 2 1 9 7 8 4 6 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 Utilizing the stem-and leaf method. 86.Discussion Questions Week Three 2 Discussion Questions Week Three If someone had to create a data base. Stem-and-leaf plot. 96. Given the following data collected from a final exam in statistics. Four pupils obtained in the 70’s. 67. 94. 82. 100. 90. One scored 34. 95. range. 89. box plot. The data demonstrates that the minimum score was 15 and the maximum score was 100. there are several descriptive statistics that should be included in the data base. One scored 46. 59. 70. the significant number is shown on the left column and the leaf digits follow in sequence from minimum to maximum along each row. 91. range. mean. followed very closely by people who scored in the 80’s. medium. 27. mode. 65. create a data base. 77. 69. Report your numbers and cut and paste graphs and other important information into your post. Box plot. and a line. 72. frequency distribution. 34. 78. mean. 22. and two scored 55 and 59 respectively. 80. 82. 93. 84. variance. 88. They include a stem-and-leaf plot. 92. bar or pie chart.

the median is not in the middle of the box. The length from the third quartile to the median is bigger than the length from the median to the first quartile. we can deduce that the distribution of scores is adversely skewed since the line to the left of the box (Q1) to the lowest score of 15 is lengthier than the line on the right of the box (Q3) to the highest value of 100. I developed a box plot (that was impossible to paste into this document).50 79. Frequency distribution . This showed that the distribution of scores is adversely skewed. To describe further.75 29.Discussion Questions Week Three 3 Statistics Test Scores #1 count 30 mean 70.87 sample variance 601.00 0 1 0 0 Utilizing the above details.53 minimum 15 maximum 100 range 85 1st quartile median 3rd quartile interquartile range mode low limits low outliers high outliers high limits 60.25 82.57 sample standard deviation 24.00 89. From the box plot.

3 1 3. Depending on the frequency distribution and the histogram graph. The pie graph visually shows that the biggest number of 24% of pupils scored in between 81-90 and 91-100 respectively. one can immediately figure out that the majority of pupils scored in between 80 and 100 in the examination and there was a fairly abnormally large number of pupils who scored among 20 and 30. .Discussion Questions Week Three 4 For frequency distribution. Pie Chart I developed a pie graph (that was not possible to paste into this post) which demonstrates the proportion of pupils who obtained within particular score ranges shown in the answer.3 29 96. the below result was accomplished utilizing MegaStat depending on the test scores of the pupils: Frequency Distribution .0 Utilizing the above data.0 22 73.7 11 36.3 2 6.7 6 20.3 30 100.7 3 10.0 cumulative frequency percent 1 3. 31-40 and 41-50 respectively. 10% of pupils scored in between 21 and 30.3 7 23.3 3 10.3 5 16.7 30 100.3 4 13. The minimum number was 3% that scored in between 11-20.0 4 13.Quantitative Data lower upper midpoint width 10 < 20 15 10 20 < 30 25 10 30 < 40 35 10 40 < 50 45 10 50 < 60 55 10 60 < 70 65 10 70 < 80 75 10 80 < 90 85 10 90 < 100 95 10 100 < 110 105 10 frequency percent 1 3.0 1 3. going contrary to the natural flow of the distribution.0 8 26.3 1 3.7 15 50. 7% scored in between 51-60. I developed a histogram bar chart (the histogram was impossible to past into this document).3 7 23. and 13% scored in between 61-70 and 71-80 respectively.

250 % of chi-sq 3.000 64 40.000 1. model 1 sold 33.400 24.500 7.90 39.225 -10.000 O-E (O .400 10.72 39.225 0.500 -24. If the dealer expected to sell 40 of each.E)² / E -7.000 1.000 14. is there a significant change from the expected pattern? Run a chi-square test using megastat and interpret the result.000 14.000 47 40. model 2 sold 30.00 .38 100. model 3 sold 16.000 240 240. The below table displays the quantity of items sold for every model type and the predicted quantity of items sold: Observed Expected Model 1 33 40 Model 2 30 40 Model 3 16 40 Model 4 64 40 Model 5 50 40 Model 6 47 40 Utilizing the chi-square benefits of fit test in MegaStat.38 6. we can assess if we have a significant deviation from the expected pattern. the below outcome resulted: Decency of Fit Test observed expected 33 40.000 50 40.000 16 40.000 30 40.000 2. model 5 sold 50 and model 6 sold 47 cars. The following monthly data was obtained from a car dealer.Discussion Questions Week Three 5 When we have categorical or nominal data.000 2.72 6.000 36.90 3. model 4 sold 64.

write the question in such a way that you can determine which of four price ranges customers would be willing to pay. There's enough proof to decide that the data doesn't adhere to the predicted trend. but that is for a later class) to answer the question. Create a simple question about demand for a product you dream up. For example. Graph the information using a histogram and a scatter plot in Excel as well. Ha: Data don't follow the predicted trend. you learn that writing and testing the question is really a science itself. We turn down the null theory considering that the p-value is extremely small. your product might be a do-walking service.Discussion Questions Week Three 6 36. create a table in Excel showing the possible answers and how many people selected each answer. How does seeing the information in a graphic form provide more information? The product: A carwash service The question: How much are you willing to pay for a carwash service (once a week/ 4 times per month)? a) >$150 b) $100-$150 c) $50-$99 d) <$50 . While we are not focused on how to write a good survey question in this discussion. After asking a few friends and family (which is not the best way to sample.25chi-square 5df 8.46E-07p-value Interpretation: Ho: Data responds the predicted trend. For now.

947 0.cannot paste) demonstrates that the people are more prepared to pay money for the facility in the range of $0-$150 and the vast majority thinks that the best price structure will be C ($50-$99). Interpret the correlation and the regression analysis. Number of students 5699 12023 21696 32018 45002 Number of pizzas sold 7018 11234 39133 42012 63023 SUMMARY OUTPUT Regression Statistics Multiple R R Square Adjusted R Square Standard Error Observations 0. Run a regression analysis looking for a linear trend. listed below are the outcomes: Price Range A B C D # of people 2 5 9 3 The histogram and spread diagram (not displayed here . and your regression line by copying and pasting it into this forum.Discussion Questions Week Three 7 Soon after surveying twenty friends and family. Show your data.5 5 .929 6192.973 0. Create a table showing the size of a college in students and how many pizzas the local pizzeria sells in a year. your r.

. Coefficient of determination is 0. that shows that there's extremely strong connection between the quantity of pupils and the quantity of pizzas sold.Discussion Questions Week Three 8 ANOVA Regression Residual Total df 1 3 4 SS MS 2052661560 2052661560 115040602 38346867 2167702162 Standard Intercept Number of students Coefficients -1107.00527 Interpretation: The scatter plot (not displayed here) revealed an extremely strong connection between the quantity of pupils and the quantity of pizzas sold all through the year.529 Significance F 0.00527 F 53. It may be viewed as: 94. We have enough proof to decide that there's important connection between the quantity of pizzas sold and the quantity of pupils.7% of the variation in the quantity of pizzas sold can be shown by the difference in the quantity of pupils.316 P-value 0. We turn down the null theory of no connection.947.9 0.6 1. Correlation coefficient is 0.197 t Stat -0.84957 0.05). It is extremely near to 1.00527 and it's really small (under 0. p-value is 0.442 Error 5361.973.207 7.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd