In a test of the effectiveness of a new battery design, 16 battery-powered music boxes are randomly provided with either the old design or the new version. Hours of playing time before battery failure were as follows: New battery type (hrs) 3.3 6.4 3.9 5.4 5.1 4.6 4.9 7.2 Old battery type (hrs) 4.2 2.9 4.5 4.9 5.0 5.1 3.2 4.0 Assuming normal populations with equal variances. The null and alternative hypotheses are used to determine whether the new battery could be better than the old design. At 1% level of significance what is your conclusion? There is enough evidence to support the claim There is no enough evidence to support the claim There is enough evidence to reject the claim There is no enough evidence to reject the claim
- Question 10 of 21
- Moving to another question will save this response.
Question 10
In a test of the effectiveness of a new battery design, 16 battery-powered music boxes are randomly provided with either the old design or the new version. Hours of playing time before battery failure were as follows:
|
New battery type (hrs) |
3.3 |
6.4 |
3.9 |
5.4 |
5.1 |
4.6 |
4.9 |
7.2 |
|
Old battery type (hrs) |
4.2 |
2.9 |
4.5 |
4.9 |
5.0 |
5.1 |
3.2 |
4.0 |
Assuming normal populations with equal variances. The null and alternative hypotheses are used to determine whether the new battery could be better than the old design. At 1% level of significance what is your conclusion?
|
There is enough evidence to support the claim |
||
|
There is no enough evidence to support the claim |
||
|
There is enough evidence to reject the claim |
||
|
There is no enough evidence to reject the claim |
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 4 steps
