Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
MATH 1040
Tues/thurs@ 10
9/23/14
orange
yellow
red
green
purple
yellow
red
green
purple
You can conclude that based on the collected data that out of 2435 skittles; 20.534% were
red, 18.316% were orange, 19.466% were yellow, 20.656% were green, and 21.027%
were purple. It appears that there are a fairly similar number of each color of skittle
distributed into the bags, although if you base your values upon the data collected from
individual bags of skittles, you may not believe this to be so. My bag of skittles, for
instance, contained an unusually high number of yellow candies.
red
orange
yellow
green
purple
orange
green
purple
yellow
Reflection
Quantitative data consist of numbers representing counts or measurements. Categorical or
Qualitative data consist of names or labels that are not numbers representing counts or
measurements. Quantitative data is expressed well in a scatterplot, time-series graph,
frequency polygon, and stem and leaf plot. On the contrary, Qualitative data is expressed best
in bar graphs, pie charts, and pareto charts. Quantitative data is countable and its differences
are meaningful. For instance, 200$, 700$, 35$ can be ordered and their differences are
meaningful. Qualitative data is not countable and its differences are not meaningful. For
example the responses yes, no, and maybe cannot be counted or ordered. Subtracting one zip
code from another or one ranking of 1-5 stars from another does not make sense, thus it is not
meaningful.
Hypothesis Tests
Hypothesis Test: a procedure testing a claim about a property of a population
Use a .05 significance level to test the claim that 20% of all Skittles candies are red:
H0: p= .2 (original claim)
H1: p.2
p= .5101 > .05 significance level
There is not sufficient evidence to reject the null, because p value is > significance level.
Use a .01 significance level to test the claim that the man number of candies is a bag of
Skittles is 55.
H0: u= 55 (original claim)
H1: u55
p= .000143 < .01 significance level
There is sufficient evidence to reject the null because the p value is < the significance level.
Reflection
A confidence interval gives us a range of values that the population parameter we are testing
should fall within. The percentage describes the degree of confidence we have in the accuracy
of the range we have calculated. The 99% confidence interval estimate for the true
proportion of yellow candies was 17.43%-21.57%. The actual data reflected a 19.47%
proportion of yellow candies, which does fall within our confidence interval. The 95%
confidence interval estimate for the true mean number of candies per bag was 59.798-68.36.
The actual data reflected 64.079 as the mean number of candies per bag, which does fall
within our confidence interval. The 98% confidence interval estimate for the standard
deviation of the number of candies per bag was 11.106-20.488. The actual data reflected a
standard deviation of 13.025, which does fall within the confidence interval. So it appears we
can safely conclude that our data did fall within a reasonable range, which validates to some
degree, the accuracy of our data.
Our hypothesis testing also lines up with the data we collected. We conducted a hypothesis
test on a claim that 20% of all the Skittles were red, which revealed that there was not enough
evidence to reject that claim. Our data revealed that 20.53% of our candies were red. The
second hypothesis test we conducted on the claim that the mean number of Skittles per bag
was 55 revealed that there was sufficient evidence to reject that claim. Our data collected
revealed a mean of 64.079 candies per bag. Because our confidence intervals and hypothesis
testing correlates with the data we collected, it validates the accuracy of our data.
Our sampling method was certainly imperfect. It left a lot of trust in the hands of students
who may have forgotten to do the project until the last minute and subsequently made up
numbers, or may have forgotten what size of bag to purchase, or people may have miscounted,
which may account for the outliers. It may have been better to have some oversight on the
counting process to ensure accuracy of data collection. Fortunately, our sample size was large
enough that it helped make our experiment more accurate by averaging out some of those
inconsistencies.