The recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders is 15%. A warden suspects that this percent is lower if the sex offender is also a drug addict. Of the 397 convicted sex offenders who were also drug addicts, 44 of them became repeat offenders. What can be concluded at the αα = 0.10 level of significance? For this study, we should use The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: (please enter a decimal) H1: (Please enter a decimal) The test statistic = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) The p-value is αα Based on this, we should the null hypothesis. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study. If the sample proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 11% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are surveyed then there would be a 1.44% chance of concluding that fewer than 15% of convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders. There is a 15% chance of a Type I error. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 397 inner city residents are surveyed then there would be a 1.44% chance that fewer than 11% of the 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders. There is a 1.44% chance that fewer than 15% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders. Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study. There is a 10% chance that Lizard People aka "Reptilians" are running the world. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%. There is a 10% chance that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%.

The recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders is 15%. A warden suspects that this percent is lower if the sex offender is also a drug addict. Of the 397 convicted sex offenders who were also drug addicts, 44 of them became repeat offenders. What can be concluded at the αα = 0.10 level of significance? For this study, we should use The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: (please enter a decimal) H1: (Please enter a decimal) The test statistic = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) The p-value is αα Based on this, we should the null hypothesis. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study. If the sample proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 11% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are surveyed then there would be a 1.44% chance of concluding that fewer than 15% of convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders. There is a 15% chance of a Type I error. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 397 inner city residents are surveyed then there would be a 1.44% chance that fewer than 11% of the 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders. There is a 1.44% chance that fewer than 15% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders. Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study. There is a 10% chance that Lizard People aka "Reptilians" are running the world. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%. There is a 10% chance that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%.

Algebra & Trigonometry with Analytic Geometry

13th Edition

ISBN:9781133382119

Author:Swokowski

Publisher:Swokowski

Chapter5: Inverse, Exponential, And Logarithmic Functions

Section5.6: Exponential And Logarithmic Equations

Problem 64E

See similar textbooks

Related questions

Question

HELP ON C, D, and E. Please show me how to get to the answer on a T184 calculator as well as paper.

For this study, we should use
The null and alternative hypotheses would be:
Ho: (please enter a decimal)
H₁: (Please enter a decimal)

The test statistic = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)
The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)
The p-value is αα
Based on this, we should the null hypothesis.
Thus, the final conclusion is that ...
- The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%.
- The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%.
- The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly lower than 15% at αα = 0.10, so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%.
Interpret the p-value in the context of the study.
- If the sample proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 11% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are surveyed then there would be a 1.44% chance of concluding that fewer than 15% of convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders.
- There is a 15% chance of a Type I error.
- If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 397 inner city residents are surveyed then there would be a 1.44% chance that fewer than 11% of the 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders.
- There is a 1.44% chance that fewer than 15% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders.
Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study.
- There is a 10% chance that Lizard People aka "Reptilians" are running the world.
- If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 15%.
- There is a 10% chance that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%.
- If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 15% and if another 397 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 10% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is lower than 15%.

Expert Solution

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 1 images

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here