An ecologist who analyzes water samples tests the nullhypothesis that any contaminants in the water are belowdangerous concentrations. Because he uses a = 0.05, aset of samples from a small lake that produced a P-valueof 0.07 led him to conclude that the evidence did notpoint to unsafe water conditions. Which is true?A) There’s a 7% chance the lake’s water really is safe.B) There’s a 93% chance the lake’s water really is safe.C) There’s a 7% chance his sampling would have shownas much contamination as it did even if the lake’swater really is safe.D) If the lake’s water really is unsafe, there’s a 5%chance he wouldn’t notice.E) If he had taken more samples, he probably wouldhave rejected the null and concluded that the waterwas unsafe.
An ecologist who analyzes water samples tests the null
hypothesis that any contaminants in the water are below
dangerous concentrations. Because he uses a = 0.05, a
set of samples from a small lake that produced a P-value
of 0.07 led him to conclude that the evidence did not
point to unsafe water conditions. Which is true?
A) There’s a 7% chance the lake’s water really is safe.
B) There’s a 93% chance the lake’s water really is safe.
C) There’s a 7% chance his sampling would have shown
as much contamination as it did even if the lake’s
water really is safe.
D) If the lake’s water really is unsafe, there’s a 5%
chance he wouldn’t notice.
E) If he had taken more samples, he probably would
have rejected the null and concluded that the water
was unsafe.
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
