Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south higher than the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west? 356 of the 579 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by humans while 322 of the 597 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What can be concluded at the a = 0.01 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use z-test for the difference between two population proportions b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: p1 p2 |(please enter a decimal) H1: [p1 p2 (Please enter a decimal) c. The test statistic z v - 2.619 (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) d. The p-value = 0.0213 e. The p-value is > a f. Based on this, we should fail to reject g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) the null hypothesis. ) The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 579 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is higher than the proportion of the 597 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is higher than the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is higher than the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.
Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south higher than the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west? 356 of the 579 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by humans while 322 of the 597 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What can be concluded at the a = 0.01 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use z-test for the difference between two population proportions b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: p1 p2 |(please enter a decimal) H1: [p1 p2 (Please enter a decimal) c. The test statistic z v - 2.619 (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) d. The p-value = 0.0213 e. The p-value is > a f. Based on this, we should fail to reject g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) the null hypothesis. ) The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 579 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is higher than the proportion of the 597 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is higher than the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is higher than the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
6th Edition
ISBN:9781119256830
Author:Amos Gilat
Publisher:Amos Gilat
Chapter1: Starting With Matlab
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1P
Related questions
Question
#9
Transcribed Image Text:Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south higher than the proportion of wildfires caused
by humans in the west? 356 of the 579 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by
humans while 322 of the 597 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What
can be concluded at the a = 0.01 level of significance?
a. For this study, we should use z-test for the difference between two population proportions
b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be:
Ho: p1
p2
v (please enter a decimal)
H1: p1
p2
v (Please enter a decimal)
c. The test statistic z v = 2.619
(please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)
d. The p-value = 0.0213
(Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)
e. The p-value is >v a
f. Based on this, we should fail to reject
g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ...
v the null hypothesis.
O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude
that the proportion of the 579 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is higher than
the proportion of the 597 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west.
O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is statistically significant
evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the
south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.
O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to
conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is higher
than the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.
O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude
that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is higher than the
population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west.
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 8 steps with 2 images
Recommended textbooks for you
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Statistics
ISBN:
9780134683416
Author:
Ron Larson, Betsy Farber
Publisher:
PEARSON
The Basic Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319042578
Author:
David S. Moore, William I. Notz, Michael A. Fligner
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319013387
Author:
David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, Bruce A. Craig
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman