Does 10K running time decrease when the runner listens to music? Nine runners were timed as they ran a10K with and without listening to music. The running times in minutes are shown below.Running TimeWithMusic 45 36 42 37 52 47 40 53 50Without46 37 47 38 54 44 43 51 53MusicAssume a Normal distribution. What can be concluded at the the a = 0.10 level of significance?For this study, we should use Select an answera. The null and alternative hypotheses would be:Ho: Select an answer vSelect an answer vSelect an answer v (please enter a decimal)H: Select an answer vSelect an answer vSelect an answer v| (Please enter a decimal)b. The test statistic ?v =|(please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)c. The p-value =(Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)d. The p-value is ? vae. Based on this, we should Select an answerf. Thus, the final conclusion is that...v the null hypothesis.O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.10, so there is sufficient evidence to concludethat the nine runners finished in less time on average with music compared to running withoutmusic.O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.10, so there is statistically significantevidence to conclude that the population mean running time with music is equal to thepopulation mean running time without music.O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.10, so there is insufficient evidence toconclude that the population mean running time with music is less than the population meanrunning time without music.O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.10, so there is sufficient evidence to concludethat the population mean running time with music is less than the population mean runningtime without music.g. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study.O If the population mean running time with music is the same as the population mean runningtime without music and if another 9 runners compete with and without music then there wouldbe a 8.95% chance that the mean running time for the 9 runners would be at least 1.2 minutesless with music compared to them running without music.O There is a 8.95% chance that the mean running time for the 9 runners with music is at least 1.2minutes less than the mean time for these 9 runners without music.O There is a 8.95% chance of a Type I error.Olf the sample mean running time with music for the 9 runners is the same as the sample meanrunning time without music for these 9 runners and if another 9 runners are observed runningthe 10K with and without music then there would be a 8.95% chance of concluding that themean running time with music for the 9 runners is at least 1.2 minutes less than the meanrunning time for these 9 runners without music.h. Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study.O If the population mean running time with music is the same as the population mean runningtime without music and if another 9 runners compete with and without music then there wouldbe a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the population mean runningtime with music is less than the population mean running time without musicO There is a 10% chance that the population mean running time is the same with and withoutmusic.O If the population mean running time with music is the same as the population mean runningtime without music and if another 9 runners compete in the 10K with and without music, thenthere would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the sample meanrunning times with music and without music for these 9 runners differ from each other.O There is a 10% chance that the runners aren't in good enough shape to run a 10K, so music isirrelevant.

Question

Accepted Answer

Since you have posted a question with multiple sub-parts, we will solve first three subparts for…