Free

© All Rights Reserved

37 views

Free

© All Rights Reserved

- Homicides in Chicago: 2005, 2010 and 2015
- agresti-1992-exact-inference
- Stat
- ANOVA_NEW
- Impact of Microcredit on Socio-Cultural Status of Members of Wshgs; A Study in Jagatsinghpur District
- A 0340103
- 3.a Study.full
- Guidelines for the Statistics Research Presentation
- Variables and Hypotheses
- MANOVA
- final paper seniors (2)
- term project compiled
- Stats Homework 3
- Assessing Teaching Readiness of University Students in Cross River State, Nigeria
- Module 6 Feed Forward.info
- RF20_2012_11_02
- The Relationship between Work Environment into Women’s Career Development and Job Satisfaction in the United Arab Emirates: a Large Scale Sampling
- Peer effects and tracking
- MI Paper 2 Solns.pdf
- 14642modelselection-160909032657

You are on page 1of 13

1.

STAT 314

If we define s = MSE , then s is an estimate of the common population standard deviation,

, of the populations under consideration. (This presumes, of course, that the equalstandard-deviations assumption holds.)

2.

Explain the reason for the word variance in the phrase analysis of variance.

The reason for the word variance in the phrase analysis of variance is because the analysis

of variance procedure for comparing means involves analyzing the variation in the sample

data.

3.

The null and alternative hypotheses for a one-way ANOVA test are

H 0 : 1 = 2 = L = k

H a : Not all means are equal.

Suppose in reality that the null hypothesis is false. Does this mean that no two of the populations

have the same mean? If not, what does it mean?

If, in reality, the null hypothesis is false, this translates into Not all of the means are the

same or equivalently At least two of the means are not the same. (Notice that at least

two applies to 2 or 3 or or k means.) This last statement in quotes is not equivalent to

saying No two of the populations have the same mean since this is equivalent to saying,

All of the population means are different.

4.

a. as a measure of variation among the sample means.

MSTr (or SSTr) is a statistic that measures the variation among the sample means for a

one-way ANOVA.

b. as a measure of variation within the samples.

MSE (or SSE) is a statistic that measures the variation within the samples for a one-way

ANOVA.

c. to compare the variation among the sample means to the variation within the samples.

The statistic that compares the variation among the sample means to the variation within

MSTr

the samples is F =

.

MSE

5.

The times required by three workers to perform an assembly-line task were recorded on five

randomly selected occasions. Here are the times, to the nearest minute.

Hank

8

10

9

11

10

Joseph

8

9

9

8

10

Susan

10

9

10

11

9

(Note: y1 = 9.6, y 2 = 8.8 , y 3 = 9.8 , s12 = 1.3, s22 = 0.7, s32 = 0.7, and y = 9.4 .) Construct the oneway ANOVA table for the data. Compute SSTr and SSE using the defining formulas.

2

2

2

2

SSE = (n1 1)s1 + ( n2 1) s2 + (n 3 1) s3 = 4(1.3) + 4 (0.7) + 4(0.7) = 10.8

SSTo = SSTr + SSE = 2.8 + 10.8 = 13.6

SSTr 2.8

SSE

10.8

MSTr 1.4

MSTr =

=

= 1.4 ; MSE =

=

= 0.9; F =

=

= 1.5556

k 1 3 1

N k 15 3

MSE 0.9

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

6.

df

2

12

14

SS

2.8

10.8

13.6

MS = SS/df

1.4

0.9

p-value

p-value > 0.10

F-statistic

1.5556

Fill in the missing entries of the partially completed one-way ANOVA table.

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

df

_____

20

_____

SS

2.124

_____

_____

MS = SS/df

0.708

_____

F-statistic

0.75

SSTr

SSTr 2.124

df Tr =

=

=3

df Tr

MSTr 0.708

MSTr

MSTr 0.708

F=

MSE =

=

= 0.944

MSE

F

0.75

SSE

MSE =

SSE = MSE df E = 0.944(20) = 18.880

df E

SSTo = SSTr + SSE = 2.124 + 18.880 = 21.004

dfTo = dfTr + df E = 3 + 20 = 23

MSTr =

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

df

3

20

23

SS

2.124

18.880

21.004

MS = SS/df

0.708

0.944

F-statistic

0.75

7.

Data on Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores are published by the College Entrance Examination

Board in National College-Bound Senior. SAT scores for randomly selected students from each of

four high-school rank categories are displayed in the following table.

Top Tenth

528

586

680

718

Second Tenth

514

457

521

370

532

Second Fifth

649

506

556

413

470

Third Fifth

372

440

495

321

424

330

s32 = 8018.700, s42 = 4614.400 , and y = 494.1.) Construct the one-way ANOVA table for the

data. Compute SSTr and SSE using the defining formulas.

SSTr = n1 y1 y + n2 y 2 y + n3 y3 y + n4 y 4 y

SSE = (n1 1)s12 + ( n2 1) s22 + (n 3 1) s32 + (n4 1) s42

= 3(7522.667) + 4 (4540.700) + 4 (8018.700) + 5(4614.400) = 95,877.6

SSTo = SSTr + SSE = 132,508.2 + 95,877.6 = 228,385.8

SSTr 132,508.2

SSE

95,877.6

MSTr =

=

= 44,169.40; MSE =

=

= 5,992.35;

k 1

4 1

Nk

20 4

MSTr 44,169.40

F=

=

= 7.37

MSE

5,992.35

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

df

3

16

19

SS

132,508.2

95,877.6

228,385.8

MS = SS/df

44,169.40

5,992.35

F-statistic

7.37

p-value

0.001 < p-value < 0.01

8.

Four brands of flashlight batteries are to be compared by testing each brand in five flashlights.

Twenty flashlights are randomly selected and divided randomly into four groups of five flashlights

each. Then each group of flashlights uses a different brand of battery. The lifetimes of the

batteries, to the nearest hour, are as follows.

Brand A

42

30

39

28

29

Brand B

28

36

31

32

27

Brand C

24

36

28

28

33

Brand D

20

32

38

28

25

Preliminary data analyses indicate that the independent samples come from normal populations with

equal standard deviations. At the 5% significance level, does there appear to be a difference in mean

lifetime among the four brands of batteries?

Let the subscripts 1, 2, 3, and 4 refer to Brand A, Brand B, Brand C, and Brand D, respectively. Each

sample size is 5, and the total number of pieces of data is 20.

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Check Assumptions

Hypotheses

Ha : Not all of the means are equal.

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Step 4 :

Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

T1 = 168 ; T2 = 154 ; T3 = 149 ; T4 = 143

= 0.05

T = 614 ;

k

ni

ni

ni

ni

j =1

2

j =1

j =1

ni

i=1 j =1

ni

SSTo = y ij

2

i=1 j =1

2

(T )

N

= 19,410

(614)

20

j =1

= 560.2

2

2

2

2

(T )

T2 )

T3 )

T4 ) (T )

(

(

(

1

SSTr =

+

+

+

n2

n3

n4

N

n1

=

+

+

+

= 68.2

5

5

5

20

5

SSE = SSTo SSTr = 560.2 68.2 = 492.0

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

Step 6 :

df

3

16

19

SS

68.2

492.0

560.2

MS = SS/df

22.7333

30.75

F-statistic

0.7393

p-value

p-value > 0.10

Decision

Since 0.7393 < 3.24 (p-value > 0.05), fail to reject the null hypothesis.

State conclusion in words

At the = 0.05 level of significance, there is not enough evidence to conclude that the

mean lifetimes of the brands of batteries differ.

9.

Manufacturers of golf balls always seem to be claiming that their ball goes the farthest. A writer for

a sports magazine decided to conduct an impartial test. She randomly selected 20 golf

professionals and then randomly assigned four golfers to each of five brands. Each golfer drove

the assigned brand of ball. The driving distances, in yards, are displayed in the following table.

Brand 1

286

276

281

274

Brand 2

279

277

284

288

Brand 3

270

262

277

280

Brand 4

284

271

269

275

Brand 5

281

293

276

292

Preliminary data analyses indicate that the independent samples come from normal populations with

equal standard deviations. Do the data provide sufficient evidence to conclude that a difference

exists in mean weekly earnings among nonsupervisory workers in the five industries? Perform the

required hypothesis test using = 0.05. (Note: T1 = 1,117, T2 = 1,128 , T3 = 1,089 , T4 = 1,099,

5

T5 = 1,142 , and

y

i=1 j =1

2

ij

= 1,555,185 .)

Let the subscripts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 refer to Brand 1, Brand 2, Brand 3, Brand 4, and Brand 5 respectively.

Each sample size is 4, and the total number of data pieces is 20.

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Check Assumptions

Hypotheses

Ha : Not all of the means are equal.

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Step 4 :

Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

= 0.05

5

T = Ti = 5,575

i=1

SSTo = y

i=1 j =1

2

2

ij

(T )

= 1,555,185

(5,575)

20

= 1,153.75

2

2

2

2

2

(T )

T2 )

T3 )

T4 )

T5 ) (T )

(

(

(

(

1

SSTr =

+

+

+

+

n2

n3

n4

n5

N

n1

=

+

+

+

+

= 458.5

4

4

4

4

20

4

SSE = SSTo SSTr = 1,153.75 485.5 = 695.25

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

Step 6 :

df

4

15

19

SS

458.50

695.25

1,153.75

MS = SS/df

114.625

46.35

F-statistic

2.4730

p-value

0.05 < p-value < 0.10

Decision

Since 2.4730 < 3.06 (p-value > 0.05), fail to reject the null hypothesis.

State conclusion in words

At the = 0.05 level of significance, there is not enough evidence to conclude that the

mean driving distances of the brands of golf balls differ.

10.

The U.S. Bureau of Prisons publishes data in Statistical Report on the times served by prisoners

released from federal institutions for the first time. Independent random samples of released

prisoners for five different offense categories yielded the following information on time served, in

months.

Major

Counterfeiting

Drug Laws

Firearms

Forgery

Fraud

ni

15

17

12

10

11

si

4.5

3.8

4.5

3.6

4.7

yi

14.5

18.4

18.2

15.6

11.5

At the 1% significance level, do the data provide sufficient evidence to conclude that a difference

exists in mean time served by prisoners among the five offense groups?

Let the subscripts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 refer to Counterfeiting, Drug Laws, Firearms, Forgery,

and Fraud, respectively. The total number of pieces of data is 65.

Step 0: Check Assumptions

Step 1: Hypotheses

H0 : 1 = 2 = 3 = 4 = 5 (The mean times served are equal.)

Ha : Not all of the means are equal.

Step 2: Significance Level

= 0.01

Step 3: Critical Value and Rejection Region

F ,( df 1 =k 1,df 2 =N k) = F0.01,( df1 = 51,df 2 =65 5 ) = F0.01,( df 1 =4,df 2 = 60) = 3.65

Reject the null hypothesis if F 3.65 (P-value 0.01).

Step 4: Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

T1 = n1 y1 = 217.5; T2 = n2 y 2 = 312.8; T3 = n3 y 3 = 218.4 ; T4 = n4 y 4 = 156.0;

5

T5 = n5 y 5 = 126.5 ; T = Ti = 1,031.2

i=1

( T ) 2 (T ) 2 (T ) 2 (T )2 (T ) 2 (T )2

SSTr = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5

n2

n3

n4

n5

N

n1

(217.5) 2 (312.8) 2 (218.4) 2 (156.0)2 (126.5)2 (1,031.2) 2

=

+

+

+

+

= 412.9086

17

12

10

11

65

15

5

SSE = (ni 1) si2 = 14 (4.5) + 16( 3.8) + 11( 4.5) + 9( 3.6) + 10(4.7) = 1,074.83

2

i=1

Source

Treatment

Error

Total

df

4

60

64

SS

412.9086

1,074.83

1,487.7386

MS = SS/df

103.22715

17.91383

F-statistic

5.7656

p-value

p-value < 0.001

Step 5: Decision

Since 5.7656 3.65 (p-value 0.01), reject the null hypothesis.

Step 6: State conclusion in words

At the = 0.01 level of significance, there exists enough evidence to

conclude that the mean times served for the crime groups do differ.

11.

A study of the effect of different types of anesthesia on the length of post-operative hospital stay

yielded the following for cesarean patients:

Group A was given an epidural MS.

Group B was given an epidural.

Group C was given a spinal.

Group D was given general anesthesia.

The data are presented below. In general, the general anesthetic is considered to be the most

dangerous, the spinal somewhat less so, and the epidural even less, with MS addition providing

additional safety. Note that the data are in the form of distributions for each group.

Length of Stay

3

4

4

5

4

5

6

4

5

Group A

Group B

Group C

Group D

Number of Patients

6

14

18

2

10

9

1

8

12

a. Test for the existence of an effect due to anesthesia type. (Use = 0.01)

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Check Assumptions

Hypotheses

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Step 4 :

H 0 : A = B = C = D

Ha : at least one inequality

= 0.01

Critical Value: F ,( df 1 =k 1,df 2 =N k) = F0.01,( df1 = 3,df 2 =76) F0.01,( df1 = 3,df 2 = 60) = 4.13

Reject the null hypothesis if F 4.13.

k

i=1

ni

20

[(4 * 8) + (5 *12)]

+

+

20

+

20

20

[74 ] + [82]2 + [91]2 + [92]2 = 1447.25

=

20

20

20

20

2

2

(T ) [( 3*6) + (4 *14) + (4 *18) + (5* 2) + ( 4 *10) + (5* 9) + (6 *1) + ( 4 *8) + (5*12)]

=

N

80

2

=

80

ni

y = (3

2

ij

i=1 j =1

[339]2

80

= 1436.5125

= 1465

(Ti )

i=1

ni

SSTr =

k

(Y )

..

(Ti )

i=1

ni

SSE = y

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

df

3

76

79

ni

i=1 j =1

2

ij

SS

10.7375

17.7500

28.4875

MS = SS/df

3.5792

0.2336

F-statistic

15.3219

p-value

p-value < 0.001

Decision

Since 15.3219 4.13 (p-value 0.01), we shall reject the null hypothesis.

Step 6 :

At the = 0.01 level of significance, there exists enough evidence to conclude that

there is an effect due to anesthesia type.

b. Does it appear that the assumptions for the analysis of variance are fulfilled? Explain.

From the description of the problem, the samples seem to be independent; however, the variances

appear to be a bit different.

c. Construct side-by-side boxplots to check the assumptions. Do the results support your answer

in (b)?

Side-by-Side Boxplots

6.5

6.0

5.5

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

Group A

Group B

Group C

Group D

Anesthetic Group

The boxplots seem to be similar in shape (except for Group B, whose spread is close to that of the

others), so our results are acceptable.

The epidural MS appears to have the shortest average stay, and it is the safest

method; therefore, I recommend use of the epidural MS for the patients.

12.

Three sets of five mice were randomly selected to be placed in a standard maze but with different

color doors. The response is the time required to complete the maze as seen below. Perform the

appropriate analysis to test if there is an effect due to door color. (Use = 0.01)

Color

Red

Green

Black

9

20

6

Time

10

23

8

11

21

5

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Check Assumptions

Hypotheses

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Step 4 :

9

17

14

15

30

7

Ha : at least one inequality

= 0.01

Reject the null hypothesis if F 6.93.

Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

k

i=1

(Ti )

ni

(9 + 11+ 10 + 9 + 15) 2

(54 )

(111)

(40)

(20 + 21 + 23 + 17 + 30)2

5

(6 + 5 + 8 + 14 + 7) 2

5

+

+

= 3367.4

5

5

5

(T )2 (9 + 11 + 10 + 9 + 15 + 20 + 21+ 23 + 17 + 30 + 6 + 5 + 8 + 14 + 7)2

=

N

15

2

(205)

=

= 2801.6667

15

k

ni

y

i=1 j =1

2

ij

+ 5 2 + 82 + 14 2 + 72

= 3537

2

k

Ti )

(

(T ) 2

SSTr =

N

i=1 n i

k

ni

(Ti )

i=1

ni

SSE = y

i=1 j =1

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

df

2

12

14

2

ij

SS

565.7333

169.6000

735.3333

MS = SS/df

282.8667

14.1333

F-statistic

20.0142

p-value

p-value < 0.001

Decision

Since 20.0142 6.93 (p-value 0.01), we shall reject the null hypothesis.

Step 6 :

conclude that there is an effect due to door color.

13.

The table below shows the observed pollution indexes of air samples in two areas of a city. Test the hypothesis that the

mean pollution indexes are the same for the two areas. (Use =0.05.) Also, verify that t 2 = F for the two-sample pooled

case.

Area

2.92

1.88

5.35

3.81

A

4.69

4.86

5.81

5.55

Area

1.84

0.95

4.26

3.18

B

3.44

3.69

4.95

4.47

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Hypotheses (ANOVA Approach)

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Critical Value: F ,( df =k 1,df =N k) = F0.05,( df =1,df

H 0 : A = B

H a : A B

= 0.05

Step 4 :

=14 )

= 4.60

Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

k

i=1

ni

+

=

8

( 34.87)

(26.78)

= 241.6357

8

8

2

2.92 + 1.88 + 5.35 + 3.81 + 4.69 + 4.86 + 5.81+ 5.55

=

N

16

2

(61.65)

=

= 237.5452

16

k

ni

y

i=1 j =1

2

ij

= 267.8549

2

2

t

Yi )

Y )

(

(

SSB =

ni

N

i=1

t

ni

SSW = y

i=1 j =1

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

Step 6 :

df

1

14

15

2

ij

i=1

SS

4.0905

26.2192

30.3097

(Yi )

ni

MS = SS/df

4.0905

1.8728

F-statistic

2.1842

p-value

p-value > 0.10

Decision

Since 2.1842 < 4.60 (p-value > 0.05), we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

State conclusion in words

At the = 0.05 level of significance, there is not enough evidence to conclude that there

is a difference in the average pollution indexes for the two areas.

The table below shows the observed pollution indexes of air samples in two areas of a city. Test the

hypothesis that the mean pollution indexes are the same for the two areas. (Use =0.05.)

Area

2.92

1.88

5.35

3.81

A

4.69

4.86

5.81

5.55

Area

1.84

0.95

4.26

3.18

B

3.44

3.69

4.95

4.47

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Hypotheses (Pooled- t Approach)

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

H0 : A B = 0

Ha : A B 0

= 0.05

Since we dont know the population variances ( 2A and B2 ) but think that they

are equal (air comes from areas of the same city), well use the pooled t-test.

Critical Values: t , df =n + n 2 = t0 .0 2 5,df =1 4 = 2.145

A

B

2

Reject the null hypothesis if T2.145 or if T 2.145.

Step 4 :

Test Statistic

yA =

sp =

nA

y 2A

34.87

= 4.3588

8

( y )

A

nA

+ y 2B

yB =

( y )

B

nB

y

nB

26.78

= 3.3475

8

nA + nB 2

( 34.87)2

(26.78) 2

165.3737

+

102.4812

8

8

13.3841+ 12.8352

=

= 1.3685

14

8+82

T=

1 1

1

1

1.3685

+

+

8 8

nA n B

p - value = 2 * P (t 1.4780) 2 *0.05 < p - value < 2* 0.1 0.1< p - value < 0.2

sp

Step 5 :

Step 6 :

Conclusion

Since 2.145 1.4780 2.145 (0.2 > p-value > 0.1 > 0.05 = ), we fail to

reject the null hypothesis.

State conclusion in words

that the mean pollution indexes are the same for the two areas.

*** Show t2 = F:

t = 1.4780 t 2 = 2.1845 2.1842 = F (off due to rounding error).

14.

A study of firefighters in a large urban area centered on the physical fitness of the engineers employed by the Fire

Department. To measure the fitness, a physical therapist sampled five engineers each with 5, 10, 15, and 20 years

experience with the department. She then recorded the number of pushups that each person could do in 60 seconds.

The results are listed below. Perform an analysis of variance to determine if there are differences in the physical

fitness of engineers by time with department group. Use =0.05.

Time with Department, years

5

56

55

62

59

60

10

64

61

50

57

55

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Check Assumptions

Hypotheses

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Critical Value: F ,( df 1 =k 1,df 2 =N k) = F0.05,( df 1 =3,df 2 =16)

15

45

46

45

39

43

20

42

39

45

43

41

H0 : 5 = 10 = 15 = 20

Ha : at least one inequality

= 0.05

= 3.24

Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

Step 4 :

i=1

ni

( 45 + 46 + 45 + 39 + 43)

(42 + 39 + 45 + 43 + 41)2

+

5

5

2

2

2

2

(292) (287) (218) (210)

=

+

+

+

= 51851.4

5

5

5

5

2

56 + 55 + 62 + 59 + 60 + 64 + 61+ 50 + 57 + 55

2

2

(T ) + 45 + 46 + 45 + 39 + 43 + 42 + 39 + 45 + 43 + 41 (1007)

=

=

= 50702.45

N

20

20

k

ni

y

i=1 j =1

2

ij

= 52053

2

k

Ti )

(

(T ) 2

SSTr =

N

i=1 n i

k

ni

(Ti )

i=1

ni

SSE = y

i=1 j =1

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

Step 6 :

df

3

16

19

2

ij

SS

1148.95

201.6

1350.55

MS = SS/df

382.9833

12.600

F-statistic

30.3955

p-value

p-value < 0.001

Decision

Since 30.3955 3.24 (p-value 0.05), we shall reject the null hypothesis.

State conclusion in words

At the = 0.05 level of significance, there exists enough evidence to conclude that there

are differences in the physical fitness of engineers by time with department group.

15.

A local bank has three branch offices. The bank has a liberal sick leave policy, and a vice-president

was concerned with employees taking advantage of this policy. She thought that the tendency to

take advantage depended on the branch at which the employee worked. To see if there were

differences in the time employees took for sick leave, she asked each branch manager to sample

employees randomly and record the number of days of sick leave taken during 1990. Ten

employees were chosen, and the data are listed below. Do this data indicate a difference in

branches? Use a level of significance of 0.05.

Branch 1

Branch 2

Branch 3

15

11

18

20

15

19

19

11

23

Step 0 :

Step 1 :

Check Assumptions

Hypotheses

Step 2 :

Significance Level

Step 3 :

Critical Value: F ,( df 1 =k 1,df 2 =N k) = F0.05,( df 1 =2,df 2 = 7)

Step 4 :

14

H 0 : 1 = 2 = 3

Ha : at least one inequality

= 0.05

= 4.74

Construct the One-way ANOVA Table

k

i=1

(Ti )

ni

(15 + 20 + 19 + 14) 2

4

(68)

(37)

ni

y

i=1 j =1

(60)

(11+ 15 + 11)2

3

(18 + 19 + 23)2

3

= 2812.3333

4

3

3

(T )2 (15 + 20 + 19 + 14 + 11 + 15 + 11 + 18 + 19 + 23) 2

=

N

10

2

(165)

=

= 2722.5

10

k

2

ij

= 2863

2

Ti )

(T ) 2

(

SSTr =

N

i=1 n i

k

ni

(Ti )

i=1

ni

SSE = y

i=1 j =1

Source

Treatments

Error

Total

Step 5 :

Step 6 :

df

2

7

9

2

ij

SS

89.8333

50.6667

140.5000

MS = SS/df

44.9167

7.2381

F-statistic

6.2056

p-value

0.01 < p-value < 0.05

Decision

Since 6.2056 4.74 (p-value 0.05), we shall reject the null hypothesis.

State conclusion in words

At the = 0.05 level of significance, there exists enough evidence to conclude that there

are differences in the branches regarding sick leave taken during 1990.

- Homicides in Chicago: 2005, 2010 and 2015Uploaded byDNAinfo Chicago
- agresti-1992-exact-inferenceUploaded bymhammami007
- StatUploaded byramaneejee
- ANOVA_NEWUploaded by42040
- Impact of Microcredit on Socio-Cultural Status of Members of Wshgs; A Study in Jagatsinghpur DistrictUploaded byIOSRjournal
- A 0340103Uploaded byAtyna Careless
- 3.a Study.fullUploaded byTJPRC Publications
- Guidelines for the Statistics Research PresentationUploaded byMikee Melad
- Variables and HypothesesUploaded byAru.S
- MANOVAUploaded byfeerdhouzt
- final paper seniors (2)Uploaded byapi-249234743
- term project compiledUploaded byapi-253521410
- Stats Homework 3Uploaded byNick Ashley
- Assessing Teaching Readiness of University Students in Cross River State, NigeriaUploaded byjojijongin
- Module 6 Feed Forward.infoUploaded byScott Hurwitz
- RF20_2012_11_02Uploaded bybehcet
- The Relationship between Work Environment into Women’s Career Development and Job Satisfaction in the United Arab Emirates: a Large Scale SamplingUploaded byinventionjournals
- Peer effects and trackingUploaded byKenn
- MI Paper 2 Solns.pdfUploaded byNg Shu Qing
- 14642modelselection-160909032657Uploaded byJasMisionMXPachuca
- 4166-21040-1-PB (1)Uploaded byrofifah nur mufidah
- inmobility.pdfUploaded byRafael Calpena
- OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATION OF UNDERGRADUATES IN MEGHALAYA.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- STAT212 093 Old-Exam First-Major SolvedUploaded byandi royhan alby
- 17.-A-STUDY-ON-PASSENGERS-SATISFACTION-TOWARDS-RAILWAY-SERVICES.pdfUploaded bySanoob
- One-Sample_T-Test.pdfUploaded byAnonymous IK1nsqBqS
- OlavsUberFinal1.docxUploaded byashish pathrod
- Preliminary PagesUploaded byHar Jang II
- 106244 ID Hubungan Faktor Personal Dengan KinerjaUploaded byLalu Sahdan
- Quantitative MethodsUploaded byAnup John Mani

- Demand, Supply and EquilibriumUploaded byLittle Chip
- Vendor Invoice Booking (With TDS Entry) and PaymentUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- brochure_hrm.pdfUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- IDRAUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Company Audit 1 NotesUploaded bykumarishu125
- Case StudiesUploaded byMaria Jose Figueroa
- Black Forest CakeUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- 2013-2014Uploaded bysayed126
- CPD Seminar Paper_08Apr10_Entrepreneurship Development in BD (1)Uploaded bynayan83
- Foreign RabiUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Demarche Haccp en Cuisine de CollectiviteUploaded byNicoleta Chivu
- BBA 08.pdfUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Lancaster Engineering IncUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Distinction Between Operating Lease and Finance LeaseUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- By :Vaibhav Malhotra Email:Vaibhav4u38@Rediffmail.comUploaded byemmanuel Johny
- HRM_notes.pdfUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Master Paper Research ProposalUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Downsid Risk.docUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Rosenthal QuantifyingConstructUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Different StrategyUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- CMA Info.Uploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Managerial Economics NoteUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- 6500 Monopoly Long ProblemsUploaded bytochibiz
- VDS on PurchaseUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Finance Bill 2014-2015Uploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- Special Points for AuditUploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- UFA-TransactionalAnalysisUploaded byAnushree Raju
- c5-09Uploaded byMamunoor Rashid
- The Macro EnvironmentUploaded byMamunoor Rashid

- OrganisationDevelopment NotesUploaded byS- Ajmeri
- bare_jrnlUploaded byMuhammad Rahmandani
- 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous BuildingsUploaded byMatthew Taylor
- AppraisalUploaded byRohan Kar
- Walton Whatwhywherefore CopyAestheticsUploaded byjbarulkar
- Applying Lean Six SigmaUploaded byjames007spy
- Building Networks for Career Change Kayode Olufemi-AyoolaUploaded byKayode olufemi-ayoola
- RRIUploaded byAsha Shivaram
- PronounUploaded byArimardan Kumar Tripathi
- Freeway Geometric Design for Active Traffic Management in EuropeUploaded byAmaefuleLawrenciaAjii
- qc_manualUploaded bySebastian Rajesh
- persuasive letter masseyUploaded byapi-242281713
- Tony Buzan - Mind Power 2004Uploaded byAhmed Reda
- Hydrolysis of Methyl Salicylate ExpUploaded byPradeep
- ch15Uploaded bypinco
- Geotechnical Centrifuge TechnologyUploaded byUhudhu Ahmed
- Stem Cells Review and UpdateUploaded byJose Martinez
- 19Uploaded byjackman68
- Personality BehaviourUploaded byDeepesh nagpal
- CA EndevorUploaded bySrikanth Kolli
- 620362_GomoryUploaded byguidelli
- Merton_1942_The Normative Structure of ScienceUploaded byAnonymous gOLbL7T5
- Mo Iwa Fun Oniwa : Individuality of Being in Classical Yoruba OntologyUploaded byToyin Adepoju
- Directory of ScholarshipUploaded bypalkybd
- Horizontal Vessel 2 Saddle design as per BS5500Uploaded bynagtummala
- Newsletter 2016 oUploaded byusmle
- TeamUploaded byrachealll
- Commercial Member Education - masterUploaded by560107
- part b expectationsUploaded byapi-283978472
- Dickerman-Stock Illustrations of Animal Intelligence (TAPhA 42 [1911])Uploaded byBudbudabuddha

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.